























■A a 

N V ' 0 a 

0 >V v - - '<* ■ 



^ - 7X/ZVra'XWP - V* ^ 

■ , *, ^ V 1 * 

■>- * *5 2*. •* ^ C> v ■* , 'ismjr+r \ 

y o * x * A> C A^ 

«,% .,0* * C °JL ^% ,%* 

1 ^ a 

oo x r 

p 


=>' ° 1 A> ^ ° V/ \vv> c. 

!* * P ^ ^ - \- A A * 


WvVs^ * V **•, * 'Zr 

■>” .# % \ 

* *Vflf,v- ^ A * 

' *r i ?/, *,% - 

S' ■* ^ 




ft ft 


: A \ -, 

s s A o, 

,\\ « V I « z, 



a A ,CT 

oV s s*«. 



AV■ ** /%" * 1 >'.<• - st »<% v 

*• , / / . ■>* V a /T\ ''*■' v^ - 1 ^ 7 *f* f 

* •* o o' « « <*- v 

, ^ E5pd^<^0 o A ’A 

- > A ^ * c 

° t *'* . o’° A ^ » 

❖ cv V *A < 0 ' > M 

a v <$» ° WWW+ -v* ^ 

. ., , . _A A^K * V A *> '■ A >5'■' , V, 

■4 «V ^ y. N rj* » <b 2> -A A V 

* ^ .»». ca * *'' a . > 1 •« \ ,, ' i * 0 ^ t »"‘, ^ ■ <..' • ^ 


*• ^,** » 



<V * S' x 0 ’ >#’ 

\% 

*" V .0.V' * 

</> ,\V QQ 





^ r\ (~, ■ 

A * j |i 4 

r - ^ A ♦ « 

^ A « 


* A V ,J ^. « * 

S A ''•If y 0 * X * A X /y y s s A 'xD * 0 « X 

/V^> cP- 

•bo' r«^l0L'. ^ > 'SmiSp* >r oo i 

* \° ^ 5 ° ^ ^ 

^ * .0 n 0 ^ A" y it o ^ ^ . # # I ' C »^ 0 - - - k~* * b M 0 0< " *^' ^ 






A' s * * * i N 0 ’ V s 

' v S - ^ O. \> 


a\ V , V I 


A* (A ^ <» .c, 

O aV <%> a WMW* ^ 

^ <X ^ A 4 oV ^ - - 

< » ^ • / 0«x' i> A S' ' b 

^ A1^,* 1 °o G 0> ° J ‘ % % 

' w ^ ^ 

* v * / ."“ '- 1 - 

/? i *w3l 



* V 0 J 
ii‘ A 

0> s s,? ' 





\ 00 ^ 


v0 o^ 

\ ^ n\v 

v»aT>*\a \>rr~'V 

«v -> ^ 'f O \; « < 0 A > * 1 S s * * / 

^ A /jsfe\ % ^ a - *' * 

i ° v\^' ^ a ' v> "%■ » o \V ./> 

^ A O' y„ . . -fc A v ^ z ^ * 












«rvV ^ ^ ^ , 

xir* * v * * * S A v | 

(V^ C° 0 « A* , * V 


0 * V 




A ” 

■**-, ^ '^C/J/- ar 'f r\ fv y '^vS-’ <. or 

^ % A * x ,0 J C 0 4 * 0 „ o ’ 

«So A 8 " o v sS AL>^ V> *'* 0 ' "* ^ v 

■*. % ^ - % ,<f * ^ « A ° 


* 





s <>^ .A. , ^ J o * v * aG 

* * <i> «* v * 8 * ^o o> c 

v ^ -t 'jj Cr * 

a\ ^ # t * 

. -t ‘^o rvX o ~ 

J r o Js^esTpfrW 0 °0 

" " r . •■■-"/ ,. 0 



<V 

, „ • S \ ’•-}■” 

o » 0 „'<*'** ' A S - " * 


A' *' 1 * * o 

<~o v -? ^ 

a\ * dr/T/X^u * 


0 * 


E.^-An W , _ 

:■>- > NT ^ 



c, 

a V ^ 



\V 

„ o. X cfv \ O plj ^ ,* aY*' 

* OS 0 ’ x # _ * 8 , x * A 0 s * » , ^ ^ 5 N 0 \\ ^ H 

%& * M&k- *** 

^ ' 'XW* »// ' S J' 'i. * "7" tS 'VS > x V ^ 

,\\ x ‘' ° V % 

J 0 * X * ^0 <^ J * * 

' M?tvf/y^ f ^ <S>vo\lrW ^ * 

:*■*: a ++ - ^ 

^ 0 o ',^^v ^ %*&***:'*.& 

, «> r ^'\s,. ,/V —’ v^',-"'. v ->.**v v - 

^A) r ' ^ ^ * TP V \N> » rK\'^ A, O 


4 ? ^ 

K ■» A 0 ' „ s c « > . . ° 

0 0* .c^ ■», ^ c • 

'' ^ V^ 

<1 



X°°<. 


; ,^ v ^ ; 

D y 



* ./% '.,W* 

v^"’;; /°'.. ” 



,> v ' ^ '■*7 * j T'^>a 

* 3 ,^' 0 N c „ y' * “ aN 

(V < . ^^ .A 6 


* ■<>' 

; ,\F * v,^ 

» a 41 - V 

<<• 0 

, 1 0 » 

^ & ON 

c „ <, 

o. 

-0 c 
x ' 

< ** " 
A n'^.. x 


x 0o x- 


>° 4 .. r v* #;% V’ v 

, > jy v ' \ ,J'>. r --~ v - 

\ C* ^ 


<■■ c,^ 

c V 



































AUGUSTUS. 

Bust in the Museum of Fine Arts. Boston. 



A HISTORY OF 
ROMAN LITERATURE 


BY 

HAROLD N. FOWLER, PhD. 

PROFESSOR IN THE COLLEGE FOR WOMEN 
OF WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY 



J15eto got* 

THE MACMILLAN COMPANY 
1923 

All rights reserved 


c of>Y 


PRINTED IN THE UNITED STATES OP AMERICA 


PA koo4 
•Ft, 

I <? &3 
Copy' 



Copyright, 1903 and 1923, 


V ./ 


By THE MACMILLAN COMPANY. 



© Cl A696686 

MAR-7’23 < 



n\ o 


PREFACE 


This book is intended primarily for use as a text-book 
in schools and colleges. I have therefore given more 
dates and more details about the lives of authors than are 
in themselves important, because dates are convenient aids 
to memory, as they enable the learner to connect his new 
knowledge with historical facts he may have learned be¬ 
fore, while biographical details help to endow authors with 
something of concrete personality, to which the learner 
can attach what he learns of their literary and intellectual 
activity. 

Extracts from Latin authors are given, with few excep¬ 
tions, in English translation. I considered the advisability 
of giving them in Latin, but concluded that extracts in 
Latin would probably not be read by most young readers, 
and would therefore do less good than even imperfect 
translations. Moreover, the texts of the most important 
works are sure to be at hand in the schools, and books of 
selections, such as Cruttwell and Banton’s Specimens of 
Roman Literature , Tyrrell’s Anthology of Latin Poetry , 
and Gudeman’s Latin Literature of the Empire , are readily 
accessible. I am responsible for all translations not ac¬ 
credited to some other translator. In making my trans¬ 
lations, I have employed blank verse to represent Latin 
hexameters ; but the selections from the JZneid are given 
in Conington’s rhymed version, and in some other cases I 
have used translations of hexameters into metres other 
than blank verse. 


v 



ROMAN LITERATURE 


yi 


In writing of the origin of Roman comedy, I have not 
mentioned the dramatic satura. Prof. George L. Hen¬ 
drickson has pointed out (in the American Journal of 
Philology, vol. xv, pp. 1-30) that the dramatic satura 
never really existed, but was invented in Roman literary 
history because Aristotle, whose account of the origin of 
comedy was closely followed by the Roman writers, found 
the origin of Greek comedy in the satyr-drama. 

The greater part of the hook is naturally taken up 
with the extant literary works and their authors; but I 
have devoted some space to the lives and works of authors 
whose writings are lost. This I have done, not because I 
believe that the reader should burden his memory with 
useless details, but partly in order that this book may be 
of use as a book of reference, and partly because the men¬ 
tion of some of the lost works and their authors may im¬ 
press upon the reader the fact that something is known of 
many writers whose works have survived, if at all, only in 
detached fragments. Not a few of these writers were im¬ 
portant in their day, and exercised no little influence upon 
the progress of literature. Of the whole mass of Roman 
literary production only a small part—though fortunately 
in great measure the best part—now exists, and it is only 
by remembering how much has been lost that the modern 
reader can appreciate the continuity of Roman literature. 

The literature of the third, fourth, and fifth centuries 
after Christ is treated less fully than that of the earlier 
times, but its importance to later European civilization 
has been so great that a summary treatment of it should 
be included even in a book of such limited scope as this. 

The Bibliography will, I hope, be found useful. It is 
by no means exhaustive, but may serve as a guide to those 
who have not access to libraries. The purpose of the 
Chronological Table is not so much to serve as a finding- 
list of dates as to show at a glance what authors were liv¬ 
ing and working at any given time. In the Index the 


PREFACE 


vii 

names of all Latin writers mentioned in the book are to 
be found, together with references to numerous topics and 
to some of the more important historical persons. 

Besides the works of the Roman authors, I have con¬ 
sulted the general works mentioned in the Bibliography 
and numerous other books and special articles. 1 have 
made most use of Teuffel’s History of Roman Literature , 
Schanz’s Romische Litteraturgeschiclite , and Mackail’s ad¬ 
mirable Latin Literature. 

My thanks are due to my colleague, Prof. Samuel Ball 
Platner, who read the book in manuscript and made many 
valuable suggestions, and to Professor Perrin, who read 
not only the manuscript, but also the proof, and suggested 
not a few desirable changes. 

Harold N. Fowler. 

Cleveland, Ohio. 

PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION 

This is little more than a reprint of the first edition, 
the chief change being in the Bibliography which has, I 
hope, been in some measure brought up to date. In the 
text only a few minor corrections have been made. 


H. N. F. 







































* 





CONTENTS 


CHAPTER PAGE 

I.—Introduction—Early Roman literature—Tragedy 1 

II.—Comedy.17 

III. —Early prose—The Scipionic circle—Lucilius . . 32 

IV. —Lucretius.47 

V. —Catullus—Minor poets. 56 

VI.—Cicero.65 

LVII. —Caesar—Sallust—Other prose writers ... 83 

VIII. —The patrons of literature—Virgil .... 97 

IX. —Horace. 114 

X.—Tibullus—Propertius—The lesser poets . . 128 

XI. —Ovid. 143 

XII.—Livy—Other Augustan prose writers . . . 156 

W - 

XIII. —Tiberius to Vespasian. 169 

XIV. —The Flavian emperors—The silver age . . . 194 

XV. —Nerva and Trajan . 211 

XVI.—The emperors after Trajan—Suetonius—Other 

writers.226 

XVII.—Literary innovations.235 

XVIII.—Early Christian writers.244 

XIX. —Pagan literature of the third century . . . 253 

XX. —The fourth and fifth centuries .... 259 

XXI.—Conclusion.278 

Appendix I.—Bibliography.285 

Appendix II.—Chronological table.297 

Index.303 


list of illustrations riCIKO 

PAGE 

Augustus, bust in the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston, Frontispiece 
Cicero, bust in the Vatican Museum, Rome .... 65 

C^sar, bust in the Museum at Naples..83 

Virgil and two Muses, mosaic in the Bardo Museum, Tunis . 113 


IX 

















BOOK I 

THE PERIOD OF THE REPUBLIC 


CHAPTER I 

INTRODUCTION-EARLY ROMAN LITERATURE-TRAGEDY 

Importance of Roman literature—The Romans a practical people 
—The Latin language—Political purpose of Roman writings— 
Divisions of Roman literature—Elements of a native Roman litera¬ 
ture—Appius Claudius Caecus—Imitation of Greek literature—L. 
Livius Andronicus, about 284 to about 204 b. c. —Gnaeus Naevius, 
about 270-199 b. c. —Q. Ennius, 239-169 b. c. —His Tragedies— 
The Annales — M. Pacuvius, 220 to about 130 b. c. —L. Accius, 170 to 
after 100 b. c. —The Decay of Tragedy—The Roman theatre, actors 
and costumes. 

Roman literature, while it lacks the brilliant originality 
and the delicate beauty which characterize the works of 
Importance the great Greek writers, is still one of the 
of Roman great literatures of the world, and it possesses 
literature. an i m p or tance for us which is even greater 
than its intrinsic merits (great as they are) would natu¬ 
rally give it. In the first place, Roman literature has 
preserved to us, in Latin translations and adaptations, 
many important remains of Greek literature which would 
otherwise have been lost, and in the second place, the 
political power of the Romans, embracing nearly the whole 
known world, made the Latin language the most widely 
spread of all languages, and thus caused Latin literature 
to be read in all lands and to influence the literary devel¬ 
opment of all the peoples of Europe. 


1 



2 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


The Romans 
practical. 


The Romans were a practical race, not gifted with 
much poetic imagination, but with great ability to organize 
their state and their army and to accomplish 
whatever they determined to do. They had 
come into Italy with a number of related 
tribes from the north and had settled in a place on the 
bank of the Tiber, where they were exposed to attacks 
from the Etruscans and other neighbors. They were 
thus forced from the beginning to fortify their city, and 
live close together within the walls. This made the early 
development of a form of city government both natural 
and necessary, and turned the Roman mind toward polit- 
Attention to organization. At the same time, the at- 

poiiticai and tacks of external enemies forced the Romans 
military to pay attention to the organization and sup- 

affairs. port of an army. So, from the time of the 

foundation of their city by the Tiber, the Romans turned 
their attention primarily to politics and war. The effect 
upon their language and literature is clearly seen. Their 
language is akin to Greek, and like Greek is one of the 
Indo-European family of languages, to which English and 
the other most important languages of Europe 
language belong. It started with the same material as 
Greek, but while Greek developed constantly 
more variety, more delicacy, and more flexibility, Latin is 
fixed and rigid, a language adapted to laws and commands 
rather than to the lighter and more graceful kinds of 
utterance. Circumstances, aided no doubt by the natural 
bent of their minds, tended to make the Romans political, 
military, and practical, rather than artistic. 

Roman literature, as might be expected after what has 
just been said, is often not the spontaneous outpouring of 
literary genius, but the means by which some practical 
ends or purposes are to be attained. Almost from first to 
last, the writings of Roman authors have a political pur¬ 
pose, and the influence of political events upon the liter- 


INTRODUCTION 


3 


Roman 

writings. 


ature is most marked. Even those kinds of Roman liter¬ 
ature which seem at first sight to have the least connec- 
Political tion with political matters have nevertheless 
purpose of a political purpose. Plays were written to 
enhance the splendor of public festivals pro¬ 
vided by office holders who were at the same 
time office seekers and hoped to win the favor of the peo¬ 
ple by successful entertainments; history was written to 
teach the proper methods of action for future use or (some¬ 
times) to add to the influence of living leaders of the state 
by calling to mind the great deeds of their ancestors; epic 
and lyric poems were composed to glorify important per¬ 
sons at Rome, or at least to prove the right of Rome to 
the foremost place among the nations by giving her a lit¬ 
erature worthy to rank with that of the Greeks. 

The development of Roman literature is closely con¬ 
nected with political events, and its three great divi- 
Divisions of sions correspond to the divisions of Roman 
Roman political history. The first or Republican 

literature. Period extends from the beginning of Roman 
literature after the first Punic war (240 b. c.) to the battle 
of Actium in 31 b. c. The second or Augustan Period, 
from 31 B. c. to 14 a. d., is the period in which the insti¬ 
tutions of the republic were transformed to serve the pur¬ 
poses of the monarchy. The “ Golden Age” of Roman 
literature comprises the last part of the Republican 
Period and the whole Augustan Period, from 81 b. c. to 
14 A. d. The third or Imperial Period lasts from 14 
A. d. to the beginning of the Middle Ages. The first 
part of this period, from 14 to 117 A. d., is called the 
u Silver Age.” In the first period the Romans learn to 
imitate Greek literature and develop their language 
until it is capable of fine literary treatment, and in the 
latter part of this time they produce some of their 
greatest works, especially in prose. The second period, 
made illustrious by Horace and Virgil, is the time when 


4 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


Roman poetry reaches its greatest height. The third 
period is a time of decline, sometimes rapid, sometimes 
retarded for a while, during which Roman literature 
shows few great works and many of very slight literary 
value. Throughout the first and second periods, and even 
for the most part in the third period, Latin literature is 
produced almost entirely at Rome, is affected by changes 
in the city, and reflects the sentiments of the city popula¬ 
tion. It is therefore proper to speak of Roman literature, 
rather than Latin literature, for that which interests us is 
the literature of the city by the Tiber and of the civiliza¬ 
tion with which the city is identified, rather than works 
written in the Latin language. 

The beginning of a real literature at Rome was made 
by a foreigner of Greek birth, and naturally took the form 
Elements of an of Greek works. This would 

native undoubtedly have been the case, even if 

Roman the first professional author had been a native 

literature. Roman, for the Romans had for some time 
been in close touch with the Greeks of Italy, and Greek 
literature presented itself to them as a finished product, 
calling for their admiration and inciting them to imitate 
it. Nevertheless there were in existence at Rome in early 
times materials from which a native literature might have 
arisen if the Greek influence had not been so strong as to 
prevent their development. The early Romans sang songs 
at weddings and at harvest festivals, chanted hymns to 
the gods, and were familiar with rude popular perform¬ 
ances which might have given rise to a native drama. 
The words of such songs and performances were of course, 
for the most part at least, rhythmical, but few if any 
of them were committed to writing until much later 
times. The art of writing was, however, known to the 
Romans as early as the sixth century b. c., for the Greek 
colonies on the coast of Italy must have had trade con¬ 
nections with the Romans at a very early time, and wri- 


INTRODUCTION 


5 


ting was thoroughly familiar to the Greeks by the time 
Rome was two centuries old. 

From early times the Romans kept lists of officials, ^ 
records of prodigies, lists of the dies fasti , i. e., of the 
days on which it was lawful to conduct public business, 
and other simple records. The twelve tables of the laws 
are said to have been written in 451 and 450 b. c., and 
these had some influence on Roman prose, for they were 
the first attempt at connected prose in the Latin lan¬ 
guage. No doubt other laws and probably also treaties 
were written in Latin and preserved at an early date. 
Funeral orations called for some practise in oratory, but 
probably not for careful preparation, and certainly not 
for composition in writing in the early days of Rome. 
The first Roman speech known to have been written out 
for publication is the speech delivered in 280 b. c., by 
Appius the aged Appius Claudius Caecus, in which 
Claudius he urged the rejection of the terms of peace 

Caecus. offered by Pyrrhus. This speech was known 

and read at Rome for two centuries after the death of 
its author. A collection of sayings or proverbs was also 
current under the name of Claudius, and he was actively 
interested in adapting more perfectly to the Latin lan¬ 
guage the alphabet which the Romans had received from 
the Greeks, and in fixing the spelling of Latin words. 

All this is, however, not so much literature as the 
material from which literature might have developed if 
Rome had been removed from the sphere of Greek influ¬ 
ence. Since that was not the case, these first steps toward 
a national literature led to nothing, though they show 
that the Romans had some originality, and help us to 
understand some of the peculiarities of Roman literature 
as distinguished from its Greek prototype. Still Roman 
literature is a literature of imitation, and the beginning 
of it was made by a Greek named Andronicus, who was 
brought to Rome after the capture of Tarentum in 


6 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


L. Livius 
Andronicus. 


272 b. c. when he was still a boy. At Rome he was the 
slave of M. Livius Salinator, whose children he instructed 
in Greek and Latin. When set free, he took the name of 
Lucius Livius Andronicus, and continued to 
teach. As there were no Latin books which 
he could use in teaching, he conceived the 
idea of translating Homer’s Odyssey into Latin, thereby 
making the beginning of Latin literature. His transla¬ 
tion of the Odyssey was rude and imperfect. Andronicus 
made no attempt to reproduce in Latin the hexameter 
verse of Homer, but employed the native Saturnian verse 
(see page 7), probably because it seemed to him better 
fitted to the Latin language than the more stately hexam¬ 
eter. After the first Punic war, at the Ludi Romani 
in 240 b. c., Andronicus produced and put upon the stage 
Latin translations of a Greek tragedy and a Greek com¬ 
edy. In these and his later dramas he retained the iam¬ 
bic and trochaic metres of the originals, and his example 
was followed by his successors. He also composed hymns 
for public occasions. Of his works only a few fragments 
are preserved, hardly more than enough to show that 
they had little real literary merit. But he had made a 
beginning, and long before his death, which took place 
about 204 b. c., his successors were advancing along the 
lines he had marked out. 

Gnaeus Haevius, a freeborn citizen of a Latin city in 
Campania, was the first native Latin poet of importance. 

He was a soldier in the first Punic war, at 
the end of which, while still a young man, 
he came to Rome, where he devoted himself 
to poetry. He was a man of independent spirit, not 
hesitating to attack in his comedies and other verses the 
most powerful Romans, especially the great family of the 
Metelli. For many years he maintained his position, but 
at last the Metelli brought about his imprisonment and 
banishment, and he died in exile in 199 b. c., at about 


Gnaeus 

Naevius. 


NJEVIUS 


7 


seventy years of age. His dramatic works were numer¬ 
ous, both tragedies and comedies, for the most part trans¬ 
lations and adaptations from the Greek, but alongside of 
these he produced also plays based upon Roman legends. 
These were called fabulce prcetextce or prcetextatce, “ plays 
of the purple stripe,” because the characters wore Ro¬ 
man costumes. In one of these plays, the Romulus (or 
in two, if the Lupus or “Wolf” is not the Romulus 
under another title), he dramatized the story of Romulus 
and Remus, and in another, the Clastidium , the defeat 
(in 222 b. c.) of the Insubrians by M. Claudius Marcellus 
and On. Cornelius Scipio. In his later years he turned 
to epic poetry and wrote in Saturnian verse the history of 
the first Punic war, introduced by an account of the 
legendary history of Rome from the departure of iEneas 
for Italy after the fall of Troy. This poem was read and 
admired for many years, and parts of it were imitated by 
Virgil in the fEneid. Naevius also wrote other poems, 
called Satires , on various subjects, partly, but not entirely, 
in Saturnian metre. Of all these works only inconsider¬ 
able fragments remain. They show, however, that Nae- 
vius was a poet of real power, and that with him the 
Latin language was beginning to develop some fitness 
for literary use. His epitaph, preserved by Aulus Gellius, 
will serve not only to show the stiff and monotonous 
rhythm of the Saturnian verse, but also, since it was 
probably written by Haevius himself, to exhibit his proud 
consciousness of superiority: 

Immortales mortdles si foret fas fere 
Flerent divae Gamenae Naemum poetam. 

Itdque postquam est Orel trdditus thesauro 
Obliti sunt Romdi loquier lingua Latina. 

If it were right that mortals be wept for by immortals, 

The goddess Muses would weep for Naevius the poet. 

And so since to the treasure of Orcus he’s departed, 

The Romans have forgotten to speak the Latin language. 


8 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


NTaevius had a right to be proud. He had made liter¬ 
ature a real force at Rome, able to contend with the great 
men of the city; he had invented the drama with Roman 
characters, and had written the first national epic poem. 
In doing all this he had at the same time added to the 
richness and grace of the still rude Latin language. But 
great as were the merits of Naevius, he was surpassed in 
every way by his successor. 

Quintus Ennius, a poet of surprising versatility and 
power, was born at Rudiae, in Calabria, in 239 b. c. 

While he was serving in the Roman army in 
Ennius* Sardinia, in 204 b. c., he met with M. Porcius 
Cato, who took him home to Rome. Here 
Ennius gave lessons in Greek and translated Greek plays 
for the Roman stage. He became acquainted with several 
prominent Romans, among them the elder Scipio Africa- 
nus, went to iEtolia as a member of the staff of M. Ful- 
vius Nobilior, and obtained full Roman citizenship in 
184 b. c. His death was brought on by the gout in 
169 b. c. 

The works of Ennius were many and various, includ¬ 
ing tragedies, comedies, a great epic poem, a metrical 
Various treatise on natural philosophy, a translation 

works of of the work of Euhemerus, in which he 

Ennius. explained the nature of the gods and declared 
that they are merely famous men of old times , 1 a poem 
on food and cooking, a series of Precepts , epigrams (in 
which the elegiac distich was used for the first time in 
Latin), and satires. His most important works were his 
tragedies and his great epic, the Annales. 

The tragedies were, like those of Naevius, translations 
of the works of the great Greek tragedians and their less 
great, but equally popular, successors. The titles and 


1 Even if this work and some treatises on grammar should be 
ascribed to a later Ennius, which is not proved, the works of the 
great poet were sufficiently various. 



ENNIUS 


9 


His 

dramatic 

works. 


some fragments of twenty-two of these plays are preserved, 
from which it is evident that Ennius sometimes trans¬ 
lated exactly and sometimes freely, while he 
allowed himself at other times to depart 
from his Greek original even to the extent 
of changing the plot more or less. For the most part, 
however, the invention of the plot, the delineation of 
character, and the poetic imagery of his plays were due to 
the Greek dramatists whose works he presented in Latin 
form. To Ennius himself belong the skillful use of the 
Latin language, the ability to express in a new language 
the thoughts rather than the words of the Greek poets, 
and also such changes as were necessary to make the 
Greek tragedies appeal more strongly to a Roman audi¬ 
ence. It is impossible to tell from the fragments just 
what changes were made, but the popularity of the plays, 
which continued long after the death of Ennius, proves 
that the changes attained their object and pleased the 
audience. The titles of two fabulce prcetextce by Ennius 
are known, the Sabine Women , a dramatic presentation of 
the legend of the Rape of the Sabines, and Ambracia , a 
play celebrating the capture of Ambracia by M. Fulvius 
Nobilior. His comedies seem to have been neither numer¬ 
ous nor especially successful. 

The most important work of Ennius is his great epic 
in eighteen books, the Antiales , in which he told the 
legendary and actual history of the Romans 
from the arrival of iEneas in Italy to his 
own time. In this work, as in his tragedies, 
he may be said to have followed in the way pointed out 
by Nsevius, but the Annales mark an immense advance 
beyond the Bellum Punicum of Naevius. The monoto¬ 
nous and unpolished Saturnian metre could not, even in 
the most skillful hands, attain the dignity or the melo¬ 
dious cadences appropriate to great epic poems. Ennius 
therefore gave up the native Italian metre and wrote his 


The 

Annales. 


10 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


epic in hexameter verse in imitation of Homer. This was 
no easy matter, for the laws of the verse as it existed in 
Greek could not be applied without change to Latin, but 
Ennius modified them in some particulars and thus fixed 
the form of the Latin hexameter, at the same time estab¬ 
lishing in great part the rules of Latin prosody. Only 
about six hundred lines of the Annales remain, and many 
of these are detached from their context, yet from these 
we can see that Ennius had much poetic imagination, 
great skill in the use of words, and great dignity of dic¬ 
tion. The line At tuba terribili sonitu taratantara dixit 
shows at once his ability to make the sound of his words 
imitate the sound he wishes to describe (in this case that 
of a trumpet) and his liking for alliteration. This last 
quality is found in many Roman poets, but in none more 
frequently than Ennius. 

The Annales continued to be read and admired even 
after the time of Virgil, though the AEneid soon took 
rank as the greatest Roman epic. Some of the lines of 
Ennius breathe the true Roman spirit of military pride 
and civic rectitude, as 

Moribus antiquis res stat Romana mrisque 
or Quern nemo ferro potuit super are nee auro , 1 * 3 

or Nec cauponantes helium sed helligerentes . 3 

Among the existing fragments are several which seem to 
have suggested to Virgil some of the passages in the 
AEneid , and there is no doubt that Virgil found Ennius 
worthy of imitation. 

1 Ancient customs and men cause the Roman republic to prosper. 

s Whom no one with the sword could overcome nor by bribing. 

* This line occurs in a context which is worth translating. “ I 
do not ask gold for myself, and do not you offer me a ransom: not 
waging the war like hucksters, but like soldiers, with the sword, not 
with gold, let us strive for our lives. Let us try by our valor whether 
our mistress Fortune wishes you or me to rule.” 



PACUVIUS 


11 


We may learn something of the character of Ennius 
from a passage of the Annales in which he is said , 1 on 
the authority of the grammarian L. iElius Stilo, to be 
describing himself: “ A man of such a nature that no 
thought ever prompts him to do a bad deed either care¬ 
lessly or maliciously; a learned, faithful, pleasant man, 
eloquent, contented and happy, witty, speaking fit words 
in season, courteous, and of few words, possessing much 
ancient buried lore; a man whom old age made wise in 
customs old and new and in the laws of many ancients, 
both gods and men; one who knew when to speak and 
when to be silent.” 

Ennius was the first great epic poet at Rome. After 
him epic poetry was neglected, until it was taken up 
Continued a g ain a hundred years later. Tragedy, how- 
production of ever, the other branch of literature in which 
tragedies, Ennius chiefly excelled, was cultivated with¬ 
out interruption, for it had become usual to 
produce tragedies at the chief festivals of the 
city and on other public occasions, and new plays were 
therefore constantly in demand. But as gladiatorial 
shows grew more frequent and more magnificent, tragedy 
declined in popularity, though tragedies continued to be 
written, and even acted. The development of Roman 
tragedy is, however, contained within a few generations, 
the professional authors of tragedies about whom we have 
any information are few, and their works are lost, with 
the exception of such fragments as have happened to be 
quoted by later writers. It is therefore best to continue 
the account of Roman tragedy now, even at the sacrifice 
of strict chronological order. 

The successor of Ennius as a writer of tragedies was his 
nephew, Marcus Pacuvius, who was born at Brundusium in 
220 b. c., but spent most of his life at Rome. As an old 


but not of 
epios. 


1 Aulus Gellius, xii, 4. 



12 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


Marcus 

Pacuvius. 


man he returned to southern Italy, and died at Tarentum 
about 130 b. c. He was a painter, as well as a writer of 
tragedies, and it may be due to his activity 
as a painter that his plays were comparative¬ 
ly few. The titles of twelve tragedies are 
known, in addition to one fabula prcetexta , the Paulus , 
written in honor of the victory of L. iEmilius Paulus over 
King Perseus in the battle of Pydna (168 b. c.). These 
plays are all lost, and the existing fragments (about 400 
lines) are unsatisfactory. Cicero considered Pacuvius 
the greatest Roman tragic writer, and Horace speaks of 
him as “learned.” Probably this epithet refers to his 
careful use of language as well as to his knowledge of the 
less popular legends of Greek mythology. The extant 
fragments show more ease and grace of style than do those 
of Ennius, and great richness of vocabulary. Some of 
the words used are not found elsewhere, and seem to have 
been invented by Pacuvius himself; at any rate they did 
not come into ordinary use. Of the real dramatic ability 
of Pacuvius we can not judge, but his literary skill is 
evident even from the poor fragments we have. We may 
therefore believe that Cicero’s favorable judgment of him 
was in some measure justified. 

The last important writer of tragedies, and probably 
the greatest of all, was Lucius Accius, of Pisaurum, in 
Umbria. He was born in 170 B. c., and one 
of his first tragedies was produced in 140 B. c., 
when Pacuvius produced one of his last. 
Accius lived to a great age, but the date of his death is 
not known. Cicero, as a young man, was well acquainted 
with him, and used to listen to his stories of his own early 
years. The shortness of the life of Roman tragedy, and 
the rapidity with which Roman literature developed, may 
be seen by observing that Cicero, the great master of 
Latin prose, knew Accius, whose birth took place only 
thirty-four years after the death of Livius Andronicus. 


Lucius 

Accius. 


LUCIUS ACCIUS 


13 


Of the plays of Accius somewhat more than 700 lines are 
preserved, and about fifty titles are known. The frag¬ 
ments are for the most part detached lines, but some are 
long enough to let us see that the poet had a vigorous 
and graceful style, and a vivid imagination. Like most 
of his predecessors, Accius wrote various minor poems, 
and was interested in the development of the Latin 
language. He proposed a number of innovations, inclu¬ 
ding some changes in the alphabet, but these last were not 
adopted by others. Besides his tragedies translated from 
the Greek, he wrote at least two fabulce prmtextce, the 
Brutus , in which he dramatized the tale of the expulsion 
of the Tarquins, and the JEneadce, glorifying the death 
of Publius Decius Mus at the battle of Sentinum in 295 
B. c. Even in his regular tragedies he departed occasion¬ 
ally from the original Greek so far as to show his own 
power of invention, though these plays were for the most 
part mere free translations. One of the longer fragments, 1 
in which a shepherd, who has never seen a ship before, 
describes the coming of the Argo, may give some idea of 
Accius’s skill in description : 

So great a mass glides on, roaring from the deep with vast 
sound and breath, rolls the waves before it, and stirs up the whirl¬ 
pools mightily. It rushes gliding forward, scatters and blows back 
the sea. Now you might think a broken cloud was rolling on, 
now that a lofty rock, torn off, was being swept along by winds or 
hurricanes, or that eddying whirlwinds were rising as the waves 
rush together ; or that the sea was stirring up some confused heaps 
of earth, or that perhaps Triton with his trident overturning the 
cavern down below, in the billowy tide, was raising from the deep 
a rocky mass to heaven. 

With Accius, Roman tragedy reaches its height. Con¬ 
temporary with him were C. Titius and C. Julius Csesar 
Strabo (died 87 b. c.), both of whom were orators as well 


Quoted by Cicero, De Deor. Nat. II, 35, 89. 



14 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


Decay of 
tragedy. 


as tragic poets. Of their works only slight traces remain. 
After this time tragedies were written by literary men as 
a pastime, or for the entertainment of their 
friends, and some of their plays were actu¬ 
ally performed. The Emperor Augustus be¬ 
gan a play entitled Ajax , Ovid wrote a Medea , and Yarius 
(about 74-14 b. c.) was famous for his Thyestes , but none 
of these works has left more than a mere trace of its ex¬ 
istence. The tragedies of Seneca (about 1-65 A. D.) were 
rather literary exercises than productions for the stage. 
With the growth of prose literature, especially of oratory, 
on the one hand, and the increased splendor of the gladi¬ 
atorial shows on the other, tragedy ceased to be a living 
branch of Roman literature. 

Before passing on to the treatment of comedy, it would 
be well to try to picture to ourselves the Roman theatre and 
the manner of producing a play. In the early 
theatre man days ^ivius Andronicus there was no per¬ 
manent theatre building, and the spectators 
stood up during the performance, but, as time went on, 
arrangements for seating the audience were made, and 
finally, in 55 b. c., a stone theatre was erected. Stone 
theatres had long been in use in Greece, and in course of 
time they came to be built in all the large cities of the Ro¬ 
man empire. The Roman theatre differed somewhat from 
the Greek theatre, though resembling it in its general ap¬ 
pearance. The Roman stage was about three 
or four feet high, and long and wide enough 
to give room for several actors, usually not more than four 
or five at a time, one or two musicians, a chorus of indefi¬ 
nite number, and as many supernumeraries as might be 
needed. These last were sometimes very numerous, when 
kings appeared with their body-guards, or generals led their 
armies or their hosts of prisoners upon the stage. At the 
back of the stage was a building, usually three stories high, 
representing a palace. In the middle was a door leading 


The stage. 


THE ROMAN THEATRE 


15 


into the royal apartments, and two other doors, one at 
each side, led to the rooms for guests. At each end of 
the stage was a door, the one at the right leading to the 
forum, the other to the country or the harbor. Changes 
of scene were imperfectly made by changing parts of the 
decoration. In comedies, the background represented not 
a palace, but a private house or a street of houses. 

In front of the stage was the semicircular orchestra or 
arena , in which distinguished persons had their seats. 
The orchestra This semicircle was flat and level. The front 
and the of the stage formed the diameter. From the 
cavea. curve of the orchestra rose the cavea , consist¬ 

ing of seats in semicircular rows, rising from the orchestra 
at an angle sufficient to enable those who sat in any row 
to see over those who sat in front of them. The theatre 
had no roof, but in the luxurious times of the empire, and 
even before the end of the republic, a covering of canvas 
or silk was stretched like a tent between the spectators 
and the sun. 

In the early days of the Roman drama, the actors did 
not wear masks, but before the end of the republic masks 
were introduced. These were useful in the 
large theatres of the time, as they added to 
the volume of the actor’s voice, and since the 
expression of the actor’s face could be seen by only a 
small proportion of the spectators, little was lost by hiding 
it with a mask. The masks themselves were carefully 
made, and were appropriate to the different characters. 
The costumes were conventional, kings wearing long 
robes and holding sceptres in their left hands, all tragic 
actors wearing boots with thick soles to raise them above 
the stature of the chorus, and all comic actors wearing 
low shoes without heels. The actors were, as a rule at 
least, slaves, but the profits of the profession were so great 
that a successful actor can have had but little difficulty 
in buying his freedom. 


Masks and 
costumes. 


16 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


In Roman tragedies, as in their Greek originals, the 
dialogue was carried on in simple metres, mostly trochaic 
and iambic, and a chorus of trained singers 
“ and sang between the acts, but probably took 
little part in the action of the play. The 
songs of the chorus were composed in more elaborate 
metres than the dialogue, and were sung to the accom¬ 
paniment of the flute. In Roman comedy there was no 
chorus, but parts of the play were sung as solos or duets. 
These were called cantica , while the dialogue parts of the 
comedy were called diverbia. 

Plays were performed at Rome on various occasions 
when the people were to be entertained, and the aediles and 
Brilliancy of other officials and public men vied with each 
dramatic per- other in showing their wealth and in court- 
formances. i n g popularity. We must, therefore, imag¬ 
ine, that when a play was performed in the latter part of 
the republican period the actors, chorus, and supernumer¬ 
aries were dressed in the richest and most gorgeous 
costumes, and everything possible was done to add to the 
spectacular effect of the performance, while the audience, 
excited by the scene and the action, lost no opportunity 
of cheering their favorite actors, or hissing those who 
failed to please. 


CHAPTER II 


COMEDY 

Comedy imported—Plautus, about 254 to 184 b. c.—Plots of 
Roman comedies—Extant plays of Plautus—Degree of originality in 
Plautus—Statius Caecilius, birth unknown, death about 165 b. c.— 
Other comic writers—Terence, about 190 to 159 b. c.—Plays of 
Terence—Plautus and Terence compared—Turpilius, died 103 b. c. — 
Fabula togata—Titinius, about 150 b. c. (?)— Titus Quinctius Atta, 
died 77 b. c.—L ucius Afranius, born about 150 b. c. —Fescennine 
verses—Fabulae Atellanae—Pomponius and Novius, about 90 b. c.— 
Mimes—Decimus Laberius and Publilius Syrus, about 50 b. c. 

Comedy, like tragedy, was an imported product, not 
an original growth, at Rome. There had, to be sure, 
Comedy an been improvised dialogues of more or less 
imported dramatic nature even before Livius Androni- 

produot. C us, but ^bese, about which a few words will 

be said later, have nothing to do with the origin of 
Roman comedy, which is an imitation of the new Attic 
comedy as it existed at Athens after the time of Alex¬ 
ander the Great, being at its best from about 320 to about 
280 b. c. No entire plays of the new Attic comedy are pre¬ 
served in Greek, but there are extensive fragments which 
supplement the knowledge we derive from the Latin imi¬ 
tations. The poets of the new comedy, Menander, Phile¬ 
mon, Diphilus, and others, avoided historical and polit¬ 
ical subjects and drew their comedies from private life, 
finding in petty intrigues, interesting situations, and 
unexpected complications, some compensation for the 
general meagreness of the plot. This kind of play was 

17 


18 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


called at Rome fabula palliata , because the actors wore 
the pallium , or Greek costume. Another kind of 
comedy, in which Roman characters and scenes were 
represented, though even in this kind of plays the plots 
were derived from Greek originals, was called fabula 
togata , because the actors wore the Roman toga. Of this 
latter kind of plays only a few fragments are preserved, 
and it seems never to have been so popular as the fabula 
palliata. 

Livius Andronicus, Ennius, and Pacuvius, all pro¬ 
duced comedies at Rome, as did other writers of trage¬ 
dies, but of these works only scanty fragments remain. 
Three writers, Plautus, Caecilius, and Terence, devoted 
themselves exclusively to comedy, and it is from the 
extant plays of the eldest and the youngest of these, 
Plautus and Terence, that most of our knowledge of 
Roman comedy is derived. 

Titus Maccius Plautus (Flatfoot) was born at Sarsina, 
a town of Umbria, about 254 b. c. He went to Rome 
while still a boy, and seems to have earned so 
much as a servant or assistant of actors, that 
he was able to leave the city and engage in 
trade at some other place. His business venture was a 
failure; he lost his money, and returned to Rome, where 
he hired himself out to a miller, in whose service he was 
when he wrote his first three plays. His first appearance 
with a play was probably about 224 b. c. Further 
details of his life are unknown. He died in 184 b. c., 
at the age of about seventy years. He was, therefore, a 
younger contemporary of Livius Andronicus and Haevius, 
but older than Ennius and Pacuvius. 

Of the plays of Plautus twenty are extant, besides 
extensive fragments of another. His total production is 
said to have been one hundred and thirty plays, though 
some of these were probably wrongly ascribed to him. 
The plots of his plays, as of those of Terence, are usually 


T. Maccius 
Plautus. 


PLAUTUS 


19 


founded upon a love affair between a young man of good 
family and a girl of low position and doubtful character. 
The plots and The young man is aided by his servant or 
characters of a parasite, but his father is opposed to his 
Eoman having anything to do with the girl. The 

girl’s mother or mistress usually aids the lov¬ 
ers, but often has to be won over by money, which the 
young man and his servant have to get from his father. 
Sometimes the characters mentioned are duplicated, and 
we have two pairs of lovers, two irate fathers, two 
cunning slaves, etc. Other typical characters are the 
procurer, the parasite, the boastful soldier, and a few 
more, who help to bring about amusing situations, and 
serve as the butt of many jokes. In the end, the lovers 
are usually united, and the girl turns out to be of good 
birth, often the long-lost daughter of one of the older 
men in the play. Sometimes other plots are chosen, as 
in the Amphitruo , which is founded on the story that 
Jupiter, when he visited Alcmene, used to take the form 
of her husband Amphitryon, and the fun of the play is 
caused by the confusion between the real husband and the 
disguised god. In a few plays the plot is less decidedly a 
love plot, but, as a general rule, the Roman comedies had 
love stories for their foundation. There is, however, room 
for considerable variety, as may be seen by a brief sketch 
of the contents of the extant plays of Plautus. 

The Amphitruo , bringing the “Father of gods and 
men ” into comic confusion with a mortal, and under 
The extant very suspicious circumstances at that, is a 
plays of burlesque, full of rather broad fun and amu- 

Plautus. g | n g situations, perhaps the most interesting 
of all Latin comedies. In the Asinaria , the Casina , and 
the Mercator , father and son are rivals for the affection 
of the same girl. Of these three, the Casina is the worst 
in its indecency, while the other two lack interest. These 
plays, however, like all the comedies of Plautus, are full 


20 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


of animal spirits, plays on words, and clever dialogue. 
The Aulularia , or Pot of Gold , has a plot of little inter¬ 
est, but is famous for the brilliant and lifelike presenta¬ 
tion of the chief character, the old miser Euclio. The 
Captivi , one of the best of the plays, has for its subject 
the friendship between a master and his slave. There 
are no female characters, and the piece is entirely free 
from the coarseness and immorality which disfigure most 
of the others. The Irinummus, or Three-penny Piece> 
has also friendship, not love, as its leading motive, 
though it ends with a betrothal. This play also is free 
from coarseness, and gives an attractive picture of the 
good old days when friend was true to friend. The 
Curculio is interesting chiefly through the cleverness 
of the parasite, who succeeds in making the rival of 
his employer furnish the money needed to obtain the 
girl. The Epidicus , the Mo stellar ia, and the Persa , also 
owe their interest to the tricks and rascalities of the para¬ 
site or the valet. The Cistellaria , only part of which 
is preserved, contains a love affair, but has for its chief 
interest the recognition between a father and his long- 
lost daughter. The Vidularia , too, which exists only 
in fragments, leads up to a recognition, this time be¬ 
tween a father and his son. The Miles Gloriosus , a play 
of very ordinary plot, is distinguished for the some¬ 
what exaggerated and farcical portrait of the braggart 
soldier. So the Pseudolus is a piece of character draw¬ 
ing, in which the perjured go-between, Ballio, is the one 
important figure. In the Bacchides the plot is more 
intricate and interesting, and the execution more bril¬ 
liant, but the life depicted is that of loose women and 
immoral men. The Stichus has little plot, but several 
attractive scenes. Two women, whose husbands have 
disappeared, remain faithful to them, and are rewarded 
by having them return with great wealth. The Pcenulus 
is chiefly interesting on account of passages in the Cartha- 


PLAUTUS 


21 


ginian language, which have for centuries attracted the 
attention of linguists. In the Truculentus , a country¬ 
man comes to the city and changes his rustic manners for 
city polish. The scenes are witty and effective, hut the 
plot is weak. In the Mencechmi , twin brothers come to 
the town of Epidamnum, and their likeness to each other 
causes most laughable confusion. This is the original of 
Shakespeare’s Comedy of Errors and many other modern 
plays of similar plot. The Rudens , or Cable , has for 
its subject the restoration of a long-lost daughter to 
her father and her union with her lover, but is distin¬ 
guished from the other plays of Plautus by the evident 
love of nature and the fresh breath of the sea and open 
air that breathe through it, making it one of the most 
attractive of his comedies. 

How much of the plots of these plays can he attributed 
to Plautus himself it is hard to tell. In some instances 
Degree of nearly all the details seem to be Greek, and 

originality probably the plays in which this is the case 
in Plautus. are s i m piy f re e translations with just enough 
changes to make them easily understood at Rome. In 
other cases, as in the Stichus , the play as we have 
it seems to be made up of scenes only loosely strung 
together, arranged apparently rather for a Roman au¬ 
dience which cared chiefly for spectacular effect and stage 
by-play than for a Greek audience accustomed to weigh 
and criticize the excellence of the plot. In some instances, 
too, the Latin play is known to be made up of scenes taken 
from two Greek plays and put together in order to pro¬ 
duce a single piece of more action than either of the orig¬ 
inals. The importance of the work of the Latin play¬ 
wright varies therefore considerably. There are, however, 
numerous passages containing references to details of 
Roman life, which must be in great measure original with 
the Roman writer; there are many plays on Latin words 
which could not be introduced in a mere translation from 


22 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


a foreign language; and in other respects also the come¬ 
dies show Roman rather than Greek qualities. We must 
therefore attribute to Plautus a considerable share of 
originality, and the metrical form of his plays is naturally 
due to him alone. 

The following passage, whatever it may owe to the 
Greek original, doubtless owes part of its unusual liveli¬ 
ness to Plautus : 1 


Sceparnio. But, O Palsemon, holy companion of Neptune, who 
art said to be a sharer in the labors of Hercules, what’s that I see ? 

Damones. What do you see ? Seep. I see two wom- 
en folk sitting all alone in a boat. How the poor 
women 60 ° things are tossed about! Ah! ha! Bully for that! 

The current has turned the boat from the rock to 
the shore. No pilot could have done it better. I think I never 
saw bigger waves. They are safe, if they have escaped those bil¬ 
lows. Now, now’s the danger! Oh! It has thrown one of them 
out. But she’s in shallow water; she’ll swim out easily. Whew! 
Do you see how the water threw that other one out? She’s come 
up again; she’s coming this way. She’s safe! 


A second passage 2 will give an idea of the style of 
some of the dialogue of Plautus. The speakers are a boy, 
Paegnium, and a maid-servant, Sophoclidisca: 


Bantering 

talk. 


Sophoclidisca. Psegnium, darling boy, good day. How do you 
do ? How’s your health ? Pagnium. Sophoclidisca, the gods 
bless me! Soph. How about me \ Pag. That’s 
as the gods choose; but if they do as you deserve, 
they’ll hate you and hurt you. Soph. Stop your bad 
talk. Pag. When I talk as you deserve, my talk is good, not bad. 
Soph. What are you doing ? Pag. I’m standing opposite and 
looking at you, a bad woman. Soph. Surely I never knew a worse 
boy than you. Pag. What do I do that’s bad, or to whom do I 
say anything bad ? Soph. To whomever you get a chance. Pag. 
No man ever thought so. Soph. But many know that it is so. 
Pag. Ah! Soph. Bah! Pag. You judge other people’s charac¬ 
ters by your own nature. Soph. I confess I am as a pimp’s maid 


1 RudenSy 160-173. 


2 Persa, 204-224. 



STATIUS (LECILIUS 


23 


should be. Pceg. I’ve heard enough. Soph. What about you ? 
Do you confess you’re as I say? Pceg. I’d confess if I were so. 
Soph. Go off now. You’re too much for me. Pceg. Then you 
go off now. Soph. Tell me this : where are you going ? Pceg. 
Where are you going ? Soph. You tell; I asked first. Pceg. But 
you’ll find out last. Soph. I’m not going far from here. Pceg. 
And I’m not going far, either. Soph. Where are you going, then, 
scamp ? Pceg. Unless I hear first from you, you’ll never know 
what you ask. Soph. I declare you’ll never find out to-day, un¬ 
less I hear first from you. Pceg. Is that so? Soph. Yes, it is. 
Pceg. You’re bad. Soph. You’re a scamp. Pceg. I’ve a right to 
be. Soph. And I’ve just as good a right. Pceg. What’s that you 
say? Have you made up your mind not to tell where you’re 
going, you wretch? Soph. How about you? Have you determined 
to conceal where you’re bound for, you scoundrel ? Pceg. Hang 
it, you answer like with like. Go away now, since it’s settled so. 
I don’t care to know. Good-by. 


Statius 

Caecilius. 


Statius Caecilius, an Insubrian by birth, probably came 
to Rome as a slave—that is, a captive—at some time not 
far from 200 b. c. Here he became a writer of comedies, 
was set free by his master, and lived in the 
same house with Ennius. He died about 165 
b. c. The titles of some forty plays by Caecil¬ 
ius are known; but the extant fragments are too short 
to afford much information as to his style, his ability, or 
the contents of his plays. As many of the titles of his 
pieces are known also as titles of plays by Menander, it. is 
clear that Caecilius presented plays of the Greek new com¬ 
edy in Latin form. He appears to have followed the Greek 
originals rather more closely than Plautus, and to have 
cultivated elegance of style rather than brilliant dialogue. 
Other comic writers of the same time were Trabea, Atilius, 
Other writers ^quilius, Licinius Imbrex, and Luscius Lanu- 
of comedies, vinus, of whose works few fragments exist, 
and who are mentioned here merely to show 
that there were writers of comedies at Rome between 
Plautus and Terence. Ho one of them, however, seems to 


24 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


have possessed the originality and exuberant wit of Plau¬ 
tus, or to have attained the elegance and polish of Terence. 

Publius Terentius Afer, called Terence in English, was 
born at Carthage and brought to Rome as a slave. He 
can not have come as a captive to Rome, for 
Af<^ erentmS birth took place between the second and 
third Punic wars, at a time when the Ro¬ 
mans were waging no war in Africa. He was the slave of 
the senator Terentius Lucanus, by whom he was carefully 
educated and soon set free. From him he derived his 
name Terentius, and he was called Afer on account of his 
African origin. He became intimate with Scipio Afri- 
canus the younger, his friend Laelius, and others of the 
most cultivated and prominent men of Rome. It was 
even said by some that the plays of Terence were really 
written by Scipio, while others thought Laelius was their 
author. This goes to prove that Terence was intimate 
with Scipio, Laelius, and the rest, and may be regarded as 
an indication of his age; for if he was much older than 
Scipio he would hardly have been charged with passing 
off Scipio’s work as his own. If he was of the same age 
as Scipio he was born in 185 b. c., and in that case was 
only nineteen years old when the Andria , his first play, 
was produced in 166. It is therefore likely that he was a 
few years older than Scipio, and was born about 190 B. c. 
After he had produced six comedies he went to Greece in 
160 b. c. to study, and died in the next year either on his 
way back to Rome or in Greece. His popularity with 
the most cultivated men of Rome testifies to his good 
breeding and agreeable manners. Suetonius tells us that 
he was of moderate height, slender figure, and dark 
complexion, that he had a daughter who was afterwards 
married to a Roman knight, and that he left property 
amounting to twenty acres. The six plays of Terence are 
all preserved to us, together with the dates of the first 
performance of each. 


TERENCE 


25 


The Andria , produced at the Ludi Megalenses, 166 b. c., 
is adapted from the Andria of Menander, with additions 
from his .Perinthia. A young man, Pamphilus, is in love 
The Andria w ^h a ^ rom Andros, but his father, Simo, 
has arranged a marriage for him with the 
daughter of a neighbor, Ohremes. Pamphilus’s servant, 
Davus, succeeds in breaking off the match, and the girl 
from Andros is finally found to be a daughter of Chremes. 
Pamphilus and his beloved are united, and a second young 
man comes forward to marry the other daughter. 

The Hecyra (Mother-in-law), first produced at the Ludi 
Megalenses, 165 b. c., is adapted from the Greek of Apollo- 
The Heoyra ^orus. Pamphilus is a young man who has 
recently married Philumena, for whom he 
has no affection. He goes on a journey to attend to some 
property, and Philumena returns to her mother. Upon 
Pamphilus’s return, a child born to Philumena in his 
absence is shown to be his, and he and Philumena are 
reconciled. This play was unsuccessful, and deservedly 
so, as it is the least interesting Latin comedy extant. 

The Heauton - Timorumenos (Self-tormentor), after 
Menander’s play of the same title, was produced at the 
The Heauton- Ludi Megalenses in 163 b. c. Menedemus 
Timorume- has by his harshness driven his son Clinias, 
nos - who is in love with Antiphila, to take service 

in a foreign army. He therefore torments himself on 
account of remorse, and he confides his troubles to 
his friend Chremes, whose son, Clitipho, is in love with 
Bacchis. When Clinias comes back from the wars, he 
and Clitipho get Chremes to receive Antiphila and Bacchis 
in his house, in the belief that Clinias is in love with 
Bacchis, and that Antiphila is her servant. Finally Anti¬ 
phila is found to be the daughter of Chremes and is be¬ 
trothed to Clinias. Clitipho gives up the spendthrift 
Bacchis. The comic personage of the play is the slave 
Syrus, who helps the young men to get the money they 


26 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


need. The character of Ohremes is well drawn, but the 
action of the play is weak. 

The Eunuchus, produced at the Ludi Megalenses in 
161 B. c., is adapted from the “ Eunuch ” of Menander, with 
additions from the “ Flatterer ” of the same 
Eunuchus author. The plot is complicated and inter¬ 
esting, involving a love affair between Thais 
and Phaedria, who has a soldier as his rival, and a second 
love affair between Pamphila, who had been brought up 
as foster sister to Thais, and Phaedria’s brother, Chaerea. 
In order to approach Pamphila, Chaerea disguises himself 
as a eunuch. In the end Pamphila’s brother Chremes 
appears, proclaims her free birth, and sanctions her mar¬ 
riage to Chaerea. The characters are well drawn, Chaerea, 
perhaps, the best of all, and the action is amusing. 

The Phormio , first performed at the Ludi Romani, in 
161 b. c., is adapted from the Greek of Apollodorus. Two 
brothers, Chremes and Demipho, have gone 
The Phormio. on a j ourne y ? leaving their two sons, Phaedria 
and Antipho, in charge of a slave, Geta. Antipho marries 
a poor girl named Phanium, from Lesbos, and Phaedria 
falls in love with a slave girl, whose owner sells her to 
some one else, but agrees to give her to Phaedria if he 
brings the sum of thirty minae in one day. The two fathers 
return, and the parasite, Phormio, from whom the play 
takes its name, now has to get the money for Phaedria and 
to secure the consent of Demipho to the marriage of An¬ 
tipho and Phanium. He gets the money from Demipho 
by telling him that he will himself marry Phanium for 
thirty minae, but just at the right moment Phanium is 
found to be the daughter of Chremes, and her marriage 
with Antipho is accepted by all parties. The plot is well 
carried out, and the two old men and their sons are well 
portrayed. 

The Adelphw (Brothers), after Menander’s play of 
the same name, with additions from a play by Diphi- 


TERENCE 


27 


The 

Adelphoe. 


lus, was first performed at the funeral games of iEmil- 
ius Paulus, in 160 b. c. Demea had two sons, and gave 
his brother, Micio, one of them, named 2Es- 
chinus, keeping the other, Ctesipho, him¬ 
self. Micio is a bachelor, and treats ^Eschi- 
nus with the greatest indulgence, whereas Demea is very- 
strict toward Ctesipho, but the result is about the same. 
Ctesipho falls in love with a harpist, whom ^Eschinus, 
to please his brother, carries off from her master. 
iEschinus himself is engaged in an affair with the 
daughter of a poor widow. The girl is, however, of 
good Attic parentage, and ^schinus has promised to 
marry her. In the end this marriage takes place, Ctesi¬ 
pho gets his harpist and Micio is persuaded to marry the 
widow. 

The plays of Terence are written in a style far more 
advanced, more refined, and more artistic than those of 
Plautus, but they show much less originality, 
Terence and w jt, an d v ig 0 r. Plautus wrote at a time 
when Greek culture was already known to 
the Romans, hut when it was less thoroughly 
appreciated than later, and he wrote not for any one class 
of Romans, but for the people. The language of Plautus 
is therefore the language of every-day life as it was spoken 
by the average Roman; his wit is of the kind that 
appealed to ordinary men, and his plays have much 
action, that the common man might enjoy them. Plautus 
took Greek plays and made them over to suit the average 
Roman. The position of Terence was different. In his 
day a cultivated class of Romans existed, who knew Greek 
literature well, who admired and loved Greek culture, hut 
were none the less patriotic Romans. These men wished 
to introduce all that was best in Greece into Rome. So 
far as literature was concerned, they wished to make Latin 
literature as much like Greek literature as possible, and 
therefore encouraged imitation rather than originality, 


Plautus 

compared 


28 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


purity and grace of language rather than vigor of thought 
or expression. These were the men among whom Terence 
lived, and whose taste influenced him most. His plays 
contain few indications that they are written for a 
Roman audience (except, of course, that they are written 
in Latin), but are Greek in their refinement of language, 
gentle humor, and polished excellence of detail. There is 
less variety of metre than in the plays of Plautus, as, in¬ 
deed, there is less variety of any kind, for Terence relies 
for his effect, not upon variety, but upon finished ele¬ 
gance. He is the earliest Latin author who tries to equal 
the Greeks in stylistic refinement, and few of those who 
came after him were as successful as he. 

Many of the qualities of the style of Terence are lost 
in translation; but something of the air of ease, natural¬ 
ness, and good humor that pervades his plays is seen in 
the short scene in the Phormio, in which Demipho asks 
Nausistrata, the wife of Chremes, to persuade Phanium to 
marry Phormio . 1 

Demipho. Come then, Nausistrata, with your usual good nature 
make her feel kindly toward us, so that she may do of her own 
accord what must be done. Nausistrata. I will. De. You’ll be 
aiding me now with your good offices, just as you helped me a 
while ago with your purse. Na. You’re quite welcome ; and upon 
my word, it’s my husband’s fault that I can do less than I might 
well do. De. Why, how is that ? Na. Because he takes wretched 
care of my father’s honest savings ; he used regularly to get two 
talents from those estates. How much better one man is than 
another! De. Two talents, do you say? Na. Yes, two talents, 
and when prices were much lower than now. De. Whew! Na. 
What do you think of that? De. Oh, of course— Na. I wish 
I’d been born a man, I’d soon show you— De. Oh, yes, I’m sure. 
Na.. The way— De. Pray do save yourself up for her, lest she 
may wear you out ; she’s young, you know. Na. I’ll do as you 
tell me. But there’s my husband coming out of your house. 


Phormio , 784 ff. Translated by M. H. Morgan. 




FABULA TOGATA 


29 


Fabula 

togata. 

Titinius, 

Atta, 

Afranius 


The comedies of Plautus and Terence have served as 
the originals for almost countless plays in later times, and 
Turpilius through them the Greek comedy has survived 
until our own day. There were other Latin 
writers of comedies derived from the Greek after Terence, 
most noted of whom was Turpilius, who died in 103 B. c., 
but of their works, which were unimportant, little remains. 
Of the falula togata , Roman comedy in Roman dress, little 
need be said. It never attained great popularity, and it 
lasted but a comparatively short time. The first writer of 
comedies of this sort was Titinius. About 
one hundred and eighty lines of fragments 
and fifteen titles of his plays are preserved, 
from which we can learn little about the 
quality of his works. He seems to have writ¬ 
ten a little later than Terence. Titus Quinetius Atta has 
left to us the titles of eleven plays and about twenty- 
five lines of fragments. Little is known of him except 
the date of his death, 77 B. c. Lucius Afranius, the last 
and most important writer of this kind of comedies, was 
born probably not far from 150 B. c. Forty-two titles and 
more than four hundred lines of fragments now remain to 
attest his activity. The scenes of the plays are laid in 
the smaller towns of Italy, and the characters belong for 
the most part to the lower social classes. In these respects 
Afranius seems to have differed little from Titinius and 
Atta, but his plays had apparently less local color than 
theirs, and thus approached more nearly the character of 
the fabula palliata as developed by Terence. 

Three other kinds of dramatic composition deserve 
brief mention, though little now remains of them and their 
literary importance was never very great. 
The Fescennine Verses , named from the town 
of Fescennium in Etruria, were originally sung 
at rustic festivals and weddings and consisted of jokes and 
sarcasms directed by the country folk at each other. 


Fescennine 

Verses. 


30 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


Fabulae 

Atellan® 


They never became regular stage performances, and gradu¬ 
ally lost their dramatic qualities, until they were nothing 
more than wedding songs. The Fabulce Atellance , named 
from the Oscan town of Atella, in Campania, 
had some sort of a plot, carried out with more 
or less dramatic unity. The characters were 
conventional—Maccus, the fool, Pappus, the old man, 
Bucco, the talker and liar, Dossenus, the clever man and 
boaster, and the like—and the whole performance was a 
popular burlesque comedy, somewhat like our Punch and 
Judy. This sort of performance was introduced at Rome 
after the conquest of Campania, in 211 b. c., and Roman 
youths of good family took the parts for amusement. 
Somewhat later, the custom arose of performing an 
Atellan piece at the end of a tragedy. The performers 
were now regular actors, and presently the Fabulce Atel¬ 
lance became a regular branch of literature, the chief 
writers of which were Lucius Pomponius, from Bononia, 
and Novius, both of whom flourished in the time of Sulla, 
about 90 b. c. Few fragments of their works remain. The 
Atellan plays continued to be performed even after the 
beginning of the empire, but the words became less and 
less important, and the performance became mere panto- 
Mimes mime. Another kind of burlesque perform¬ 

ance was the Mime, which was introduced into 
Rome from the Greek cities of Italy and Sicily. It had 
less consistent plots than comedy, and was more popular 
in its character. Though doubtless introduced at Rome 
as early as comedy itself, it hardly appears as a branch of 
literature until about the time of Cicero, when mimes 
serve as afterpieces at tragic performances. In imperial 
times mimes were performed independently. The chief 
authors of mimes were Decimus Laberius (105-43 B. c.), 
a Roman knight, and Publilius Syrus, a slave from Antioch, 
both belonging to the time of Caesar, about the middle of 
the first century b. c. No mimes are extant, nor is their 


MIMES 


31 


loss to be greatly regretted, for their humor was generally 
coarse, their plots often indecent, and their literary quali¬ 
ties of a low order. Some of the fragments of the mimes 
of Laberius show, however, considerable merit, and in 
those of Publilius so many sensible precepts and wise 
utterances were embodied that a collection of his sayings 
was made, part of which is preserved to us. 


CHAPTER III 


EARLY PROSE-THE SCIPIONIC CIRCLE-LUCILIUS 

Greek influence upon Roman prose—Fabius Pictor, 216 b. c. —Cin- 
cius Alimentus, 210 b. c. —Cato, 234-149 b. c. —Cato’s works—Orators 
—Jurists—Latin annalists—Scipio Africanus the younger, 185-129 
b. c.—The Scipionic circle — Lucilius, 180(?)-126 b. c. —Satire—Satires 
of Lucilius—Literature in the fifty years before Cicero—Poetry—His¬ 
tory—Learned works—General writers—Jurists—Oratory—Rhetoric 
addressed to Herennius—Great development of prose in this period. 

Tragedy and comedy began, reached their full devel¬ 
opment, and decayed in the short period of a century and 
a half between the first play of Livius Andronicus and 
the death of Accius. It was therefore advisable to give a 
connected account of dramatic literature at Rome for this 
entire period, and to reserve for separate treatment the 
beginnings of prose literature, which, though less rapid 
in its growth, had a far longer life and was a much truer 
expression of the national genius. 

The rudiments of a strictly native prose literature, the 
twelve tables of the laws, the various lists and records, 
Greek and the s P eec hes delivered on public and pri- 

influence vate occasions, mark the lines along which 
upon Roman Roman prose was destined to advance—his- 
prose. tory, jurisprudence, and eloquence. But 

Roman prose, like Roman poetry, came under the influ¬ 
ence of Greek literature as soon as the Romans began to 
pay any attention to literary style. It was when the con¬ 
quest of southern Italy brought Rome into closer contact 
than before with the cities of Magna Grsecia that Livius 
32 


EARLY PROSE 


33 


Q,. Fabius 
Pictor. 


Andronicus was brought to Rome, and it was in the years 
immediately after the first Punic war that he produced 
the first Latin plays in imitation of Greek originals. To 
about the same or a little later time belong the earliest 
Roman prose writers. Some of these men, regarding the 
Latin language as too imperfect for use in prose literature, 
wrote in Greek, recording the events of Roman history 
for the enlightenment of foreigners and of educated 
Romans. Such was Quintus Fabius Pictor, a man of 
much distinction at Rome, who was sent by 
the state to consult the oracle at Delphi after 
the battle of Cannae in 216 b. c. He wrote in 
Greek prose a history of Rome from the days of iEneas to 
his own times, selecting the same subject chosen by his 
contemporary Ennius for his Annales in Latin verse. 
This work of Fabius Pictor was very soon translated into 
Latin, and remained one of the chief sources from which 
later historians, such as Livy, derived their information. 

Lucius Cincius Alimentus, who was praetor in 
command of a Roman army in the second 
Punic war, wrote Roman history in Greek 
prose, as did also Publius Cornelius Scipio, the son of the 
elder Africanus, Aulus Postumius Albinus, and Gaius 
Acilius, about the middle of the second century b. c. 
Their works, being in Greek, had little direct influence 
on Latin literature, but show how powerful the Greek 
influence was among the cultivated men at Rome in the 
years following the second Punic war. This influence 
was not confined to literature, but affected dress, manners, 
ways of thinking—in short, all sides of life— 
especially among the upper classes. The 
Greeks of this time were no longer the hardy 
citizen-soldiers of the old days of Marathon and Ther¬ 
mopylae, but were now distinguished for culture, refine¬ 
ment, and scholarship, too often accompanied by effemi¬ 
nacy, luxury, and dishonesty. Hot by any means all the 


L. Cincius 
Alimentus. 


Greek 

influence. 


34 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


M. Porcius 
Cato. 


Romans were ready to profit by contact with Greek civili¬ 
zation, with its mixture of good and bad qualities, and 
there was naturally a party at Rome which opposed every¬ 
thing Greek, and wished to preserve the old Roman 
simplicity. The most important man of this party was 
Cato. 

Marcus Porcius Cato was born at Tusculum, in 234 
p. c., and died in 149 b. c. Throughout his life he was 
active in public affairs. He was quaestor 
(204 b. c.), aedile (199 B. c.), consul (195 B. c.), 
and censor (184 b. c.), and in all his offices 
showed his honesty, efficiency, singleness of purpose, and 
sincere, though somewhat narrow-minded, patriotism. He 
believed that the influence of Greek art, literature, philos¬ 
ophy, and ways of life was bad, though in his old age he 
learned the Greek language, and studied Greek literature. 
In a letter to his son, he says: “ I shall speak about those 
Greeks in their proper place, son Marcus, and tell what I 
discovered at Athens, and that it is good to look into 
their literature, but not to learn it thoroughly. I shall 
convince you that their race is most worthless and 
unteachable.” 1 

Cato was opposed to the prevailing tendencies in litera¬ 
ture—the tendencies which were destined to prevail—but 
in spite of that he was one of the most pro¬ 
ductive literary men of his time. His active 
political life gave him many occasions for 
public speaking, in the senate or before the people, and 
he spoke often in courts of law, either in suits of his own 
or as an advocate for others. One hundred and fifty of 
his speeches existed in Cicero’s time, and some, at least, 
were read and admired long after Cicero. About eighty 
scattered fragments now exist, some of which belong to 
political, others to legal speeches. These show vigor 


Cato as an 
orator. 


1 Quoted by Pliny, A. H. xxix, 7,14. 



, EARLY PROSE 


35 


and terseness of expression, a sort of dry humor, and 
straightforward freedom of speech, but no elegance of 
style. 

Cato’s most important work was the Origines , in seven 
books, the first Roman history in Latin prose. In style 
The Origines an( ^ me ^od this work was very uneven. 

Sometimes events were narrated in brief, 
annalistic fashion, at other times Cato devoted much 
space to details. One book, from which the whole work 
derived its name, told of the origins and early history of 
the various towns of Italy. The work treated of Roman 
and Italian history from the earliest times to Cato’s own 
day, and in the latter part Cato took pains to give his 
own actions at least as much prominence as was their due, 
even inserting in his narrative the speeches he had deliv¬ 
ered on various occasions. In the form of letters to his 
son, Cato composed treatises on agriculture, the care of 
health, eloquence, and the art of war. He also wrote a 
series of rules of conduct in verse, and made a collection 
of wise and witty sayings. 

Of all his works the only one extant is a treatise On 
Agriculture. Born and brought up in the small town of 
The treatise Tusculum, and full of admiration for the 
On Agricul- simple virtues of the early Romans, Cato saw 
ture< with deep disapproval the tendency of the 

men of his own day to give up agriculture for commercial 
and financial occupations. “ It would sometimes be better 
to seek gain by commerce, if it were not so dangerous; 
and likewise by money-lending, if it were so honorable. 
For our ancestors held this matter thus, and put it in the 
laws in this way, that a thief be punished by a double 
fine, a money-lender by a fourfold one. From this one 
can see how much worse citizen they considered a money¬ 
lender than a thief. And when they praised a good man, 
it was a good farmer, a good colonist. They thought that 
a man was most amply praised who was praised in this 


36 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


way. Now I think a merchant is energetic and diligent 
in seeking gain; but, as I said above, he is exposed to 
danger and ruin. But from farmers both the bravest 
men and most energetic soldiers arise, and the business 
they follow is most pious and surest, and least exposed to 
envy; and those who are occupied in that pursuit are 
least given to evil thoughts.” 1 In other parts of the book 
Cato gives in short, simple sentences, practical rules to 
be followed by the farmer. “ Be sure to do everything 
early. For this is the way with farming: if you do one 
thing late, you will do all the work late.” This style of 
short, sharp sentences, is characteristic of Cato. He de¬ 
spises all appearance of literary polish, as if he wished to 
show that the arts of elegance cultivated by most other 
Roman writers were unnecessary and undesirable. 

Cato was one of the most famous orators of his time, 
but his competitors were many, among them some of the 

. most noted men of Rome. Most of these orators 
Other orators. 

were men of natural ability, whose eloquence 
was trained in the school of public life and owed its effect 
in great measure to the weight of the speaker’s dignity or 
the glory of his deeds. Their speeches are lost, and the 
reputation they had survives only to remind us that dur¬ 
ing and after the second Punic war Roman eloquence 
was growing in power, preparing, as it were, for the bril¬ 
liant oratory of the Gracchi in the second half of the 
second century b. c., and the superb productions of Cicero 
in the century to follow. Among orators of Cato’s time 
should be mentioned Quintus Fabius Maximus Cunctator, 
five times consul, censor, and dictator, the conqueror of 
Hannibal, then Quintus Caecilius Metellus, consul in 206 
b. c., Marcus Cornelius Cethegus (died in 196 b. c.), Pub¬ 
lius Licinius Crassus (died 183 B. c.), and Scipio Africanus 
the elder (died 183 B. c.). 


Be Re Rustica, i. 



EARLY PROSE 


37 


Jurists. 


In the field of jurisprudence there was considerable 
activity in the days of Cato. Publius iElius (consul 201, 
died 174 B. c.) and his brother Sextus (consul 
198 b. c.) published the most systematic work 
on jurisprudence. This work was called Tripertita , and 
was for centuries regarded with reverence as the beginning 
from which grew the great system of Roman law. Scipio 
Nasica (consul 191 b. c.), Lucius Acilius, Quintus Fabius 
Labeo (consul 183 b. c.), and Cato’s son (born about 192, 
died in 152 b. c.) were all distinguished jurists, whose in¬ 
terpretation of the Twelve Tables and whose wisdom in 
regard to legal matters are mentioned with praise by later 
writers. Their writings have perished, but the results of 
their studies were incorporated in the later works on 
Roman law. 

The annalists who wrote in Greek, such as Fabius 
Pictor, were followed, soon after the middle of the second 
century b. c., by several writers whose works 
annalists differed from theirs chiefly by being written 
in Latin. They derived their general views 
and methods, as well as some of their facts, from earlier 
Greek historians, such as Ephorus and Timaeus. The 
first of these Latin annalists was Lucius Cassius Hemina, 
who wrote a history of Rome to his own time. Somewhat 
more important was Lucius Calpurnius Piso Frugi, who 
was consul in 133 B. c. His annals covered the same 
ground as those of Hemina, and are said to have been 
written in an artless, somewhat rude style. A similar 
lack of elegance seems to have belonged to the works of 
the other annalists of this time. Evidently the Romans 
had not yet learned to write artistic prose. Yet this is the 
period when, under the guidance of Greek teachers, the 
Romans were paying more attention than ever before to 
grammar and rhetoric, purity of language, and nicety of 
expression. 

The man about whom the best literary life of the city 


38 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


centred was Scipio Africanus the younger, who lived from 
185 to 129 B. c. He was the son of the distinguished 
Lucius iEmilius Paulus, whose victory at 
Scipio. Pydna, in 168 B. c., had destroyed the last 

foreign power capable of making serious resistance to 
the Roman legions, and he had been adopted by the son 
of the elder Scipio Africanus. He was himself a distin¬ 
guished soldier, for as a simple officer (tribunus militum) 
he had saved the Roman army in Africa, after which he 
had been made consul and commander of the army which 
brought the third Punic war to a close by the capture and 
destruction of Carthag£,(146 b. c.). It might have been 
expected that he would take an active part in the govern¬ 
ment, especially as in his time the state needed the help 
of her best citizens. But Scipio seems to have felt that 
the internal troubles, which beset the state now that 
all external dangers were over, were too serious to be 
cured. He used his influence for good wherever he was 
able, but made no systematic attempt to correct the 
abuses of the government, which led at last to the revo¬ 
lutionary disorders of the days of the Gracchi (133-121 
b. c.). Instead of being a party leader, he occupied a posi¬ 
tion somewhat apart from the aristocratic and the popular 
parties, lending his influence and his eloquence to the 
causes that seemed to him good, and in this way preserv¬ 
ing a reputation for independence and good judgment. 
His patriotism was undoubted, and his influence as great 
as that of any man in Rome. 

Scipio had been carefully educated, and employed his 
leisure in literary and intellectual pursuits. He was not 
an author himself, except in so far as he 
circle published ms speeches, which were much ad¬ 

mired, but he loved to be surrounded by men 
of letters, to profit by their conversation, and lend them 
the support of his social position and influence. His 
somewhat older friend, Gaius Laelius, who was consul in 


GAIUS LUCILIUS 


39 


140 b. c., shared his literary tastes, though he, too, re¬ 
frained from publishing other works than speeches. From 
167 to 150 B. c. a thousand Greeks of prominent position 
in their native country were kept as hostages in Italy. 
Among these was the historian Polybius, who was assigned 
a residence in Rome, and who became a member of the 
circle of literary friends who surrounded Scipio and 
Laelius. The Stoic philosopher Panastius, who afterward 
became the head of the Stoic school, was another Greek 
belonging to the Scipionic circle. The influence of Panae- 
tius upon Roman philosophy was great, as was that of 
Polybius upon the writing of Roman history. But 
Latin writers also gathered about Scipio. Among them 
were Terence (see page 24), the most polished writer of 
comedies; Hemina and Piso, the annalists; Gaius Fannius, 
a nephew of Laelius, who was consul in 122 b. c., and 
achieved distinction as an orator, besides writing a his¬ 
tory of Rome; Sempronius Asellio, whose history of his 
own times was continued at least to 91 B. c.; Lucius 
Furius Philus, consul in 136 b. c., orator and jurist, and 
many others. Among them all, the most original genius 
was the father of Roman satire, Gaius Lucilius. 

Lucilius was born, probably in 180 b. c., at Suessa 
Aurunca, in Campania. He was a member of a wealthy 
equestrian family, and when he went to live 
Lucilius -^ ome h e kept himself free from the cares 

of business as well as of politics, devoting 
himself to social life and to literature. He lived as a 
wealthy bachelor, not holding himself aloof from the 
pleasures of the capital, but not indulging in excesses. 
Most of his life was passed in the city, but in 134 b. c. he 
followed Scipio to the war in Spain, and in 126 B. c., 
when all who were not Roman citizens were obliged to 
leave Rome, he made a journey to Sicily, from which he 
did not return until 124 b. c. He died at Naples in 
103 b. c. 


4 


40 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


The name satire {satura) may be derived from the 
lanx satura , a dish full of all sorts of fruits, and as 
applied to poems by Ennius (see p. 8), desig- 
Satire ' nates poems of mixed contents. Perhaps all 

the poems of Ennius, except his dramas and his great epic, 
may have been classed together as satires. At any rate, 
Lucilius is the first writer who gave to satire the definite 
character it has possessed ever since his time. He made 
his poems the vehicle for the expression of sharp and 
biting attacks upon persons, institutions, and customs of 
his day, for genial and humorous remarks about the failings 
of his neighbors, and for much information about him¬ 
self. Ever since Lucilius, satire has been at once sharp 
and humorous, bitter and sweet. This kind of poetry, 
which takes the form of dialogue, familiar conversation, 
or letters, is not Greek, but is the invention of him who 
must be regarded as the most original of all Roman poets. 

The Satires of Lucilius were contained in thirty 

books, each book containing several satires. The subjects 

treated were of all sorts—the faults and foi- 

The Satires ^ es 0 f individuals, the defects of works of 
of Lucilius. 

literature, the ridiculous imitation of Greek 
manners and dress, the absurdities of Greek mythology, 
the folly of expensive dinner parties, the author’s journey 
to Sicily, Latin grammar, the proper spelling of Latin 
words, and Scipio’s journey to Egypt and Asia. The per¬ 
sonality of the writer, his mode of life, and his views on 
all subjects were so clearly brought before his readers 
that the Satires were a complete autobiography. They 
were written for the most part in hexameters, the 
metre which was adopted by all later Roman satirists, but 
some of them were in iambic senarii and trochaic septe- 
narii , others in elegiacs. 1 They were not written at one 


1 A brief description of some of the feet and metres most fre¬ 
quently used by Roman poets may be useful. These were, with the 
exception of the Saturnian verse (see p. 7), borrowed, with certain 



GAIUS LUCILIUS 


41 


time, but their composition was continued at intervals 
through many years, for Lucilius was not a professional 
poet, but a man of letters who expressed himself in verse 
whenever he felt inclined. His form of expression was 
unconventional, resembling conversation (in fact he called 
the poems sermones , “ conversations ”), with free use of 
dialogue. Careful literary finish was not attempted, and 
Horace, whose satires are imitations of those of Lucilius, 
blames the older poet for carelessness. But the easy and 

modifications, from the Greek. The most usual feet are the iambus 

(^ —), the trochee (—%^), the spondee (-), the dactyl (—ww), the 

anapaest (ww—), and the choriambus (— ). The dactylic hex¬ 

ameter consists of six feet, each of which is either a dactyl or a spon¬ 
dee, though the sixth is always a spondee and the fifth almost always 
a dactyl. An illustration of this is the line from Lucilius, 

Maior erat natu ; non omnia possumus omnes, 
the rhythm of which is retained in this translation : 

He was the elder by birth; not all of us all things can compass. 
The iambic senarius consists of six iambics, as 

Hominem inter vivos quaeritamus mortuom. 

(Plautus, Menaechmi , 240.) 

Among the living we do seek a man who’s dead. 

This is a common metre in the dialogue parts of dramas. It is 
one foot longer, than the line in English blank verse. The trochaic 
septenarius, also a common metre in the drama, consists of seven 
trochees and an additional long syllable. The English line 

Do not lift him from the bracken; leave him lying where he fell 
gives an idea of the rhythm. 

The elegiac distich consists of an hexameter followed by a 
so-called pentameter, that is, a line made up of six dactyls or spon¬ 
dees, with the omission of the last half of the third and of the sixth 
feet. This is illustrated and described by Coleridge in the lines, 

In the hexameter rises the fountain’s silvery column. 

In the pentameter aye falling in melody back. 

In the iambic and trochaic metres other feet are often substituted 
for the iambus and the trochee, but without change of rhythm. 

Some of the other metres will be explained or illustrated as they 


occur. 



42 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


natural tone of the poems must have more than made up 
for any lack of polish. 

The extant fragments amount to more than eleven 
hundred lines, but are for the most part short and dis¬ 
connected. In one, 1 Lucilius seems to accept 
fragments* w ith P^ easure an invitation to dinner “ with 
good conversation, well cooked and sea¬ 
soned ”; in another, 2 he reproves the luxury which leads 
to greed of gain: “ For if that which is enough for a 
man could be enough, it would be enough. Now, since 
this is not so, how can we think that any riches can sat¬ 
isfy my soul ? ” Again, 3 he describes a miser as one who 
has no cattle nor slaves nor any attendant, hut keeps his 
purse and all the money he has always with him. “ He 
eats, sleeps, and bathes with his purse; the man’s whole 
hope is in his purse alone. This purse is fastened to his 
arm.” One of the longest fragments 4 is a description of 
virtus (virtue): 

Virtue, Albinus, is being able to pay the true price for the 
things in and by which we live; virtue is knowing to what each 
thing leads for a man. Virtue is knowing what is right, useful, 
honorable for a man, what things are good, what bad likewise, 
what is useless, base, dishonorable; virtue is knowing the limit 
and measure in seeking anything; virtue is giving to riches their 
true value; virtue is giving to honor what is really due to it; is 
being an enemy and opponent of bad men and morals, on the 
other hand a defender of good men and morals, regarding them 
as of much importance, wishing them well, living as their friend; 
moreover, considering the advantages of one’s country first, of 
one’s relatives second, of ourselves third and last. 

Other fragments contain direct attacks upon individuals, 
but these which have been quoted serve to give an idea 
of the freedom of speech, good sense, and serious purpose 
of the first great satirist. 


1 iv, Frg. 8, Muller. 

3 vi, Frg. 16, Mtiller. 


2 v, Frg. 33, Muller. 

4 libr. incert., Frg. 1, Muller. 



THE TIME BEFORE CICERO 


43 


Literature 
in the fifty 
years before 
Cicero. 


The life of Lucilius fell in a period of many changes. 
As a boy, he saw the Roman power established in the east, 
before he reached middle life he witnessed the 
destruction of Carthage, then he lived through 
the troublous years before and after the death 
of Tiberius Gracchus in 133 b. c., and that of 
his brother Gaius in 121 b. c., and in the year before his 
death he saw the consulship in the hands of Gaius Marius. 
It was not until the long struggle between Marius and 
Sulla was over that any measure of tranquility returned 
to the Roman state. Then came the Golden Age of 
Roman literature. But for fifty years before the time of 
Cicero circumstances at Rome were not favorable to liter¬ 
ary production of every kind. Lucilius, Accius, Afranius 
and a few other poets lived on until about the end of the 
second century b. c., hut there was little new life in poetry. 
Gnasus Matius translated the Iliad, and Laevius Melissus 
imitated some of the lighter Greek poems. The epic 
poem of Hostius on the Istrian war and that 
of Aulus Furius from Antium (Furius Antias) 
on an unknown subject have left hardly any traces. It is 
not worth while to mention in detail the occasional love 
songs and epigrams written by various authors. Aside 
from Lucilius and the dramatists already mentioned, 
there are no poets of note in this period. 

In history, the production was greater and more im¬ 
portant. Fannius and Asellio were emulated by Ccelius 
Antipater, whose history of the second Punic 
war was of some importance, and he was fol¬ 
lowed by Quintus Claudius Quadrigarius, who wrote a his¬ 
tory of Rome in at least twenty-three books, coming down 
to the year 82 B. c. Another more voluminous but less 
trustworthy historian was Valerius Antias, who wrote an¬ 
nals in at least seventy-five books. His date is uncertain, 
but he seems to have lived early in the first century b. c. 
Two other historians of the latter part of this period were 


Poetry. 


History. 


44 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


Lucius Cornelius Sisenna (119-67 b. c.), who wrote a his¬ 
tory of his own times in an antiquated style, and Gaius 
Licinius Macer, whose annals, beginning with the earliest 
times, were probably continued until near the date of his 
death (66 b. c.). The dictator Sulla (138-78 b. c.) wrote 
memoirs, which must have possessed great historical value. 
Gaius Sempronius Tuditanus (consul in 129 b. c.) was not 
only an annalist, but also an antiquarian. 1 

Important writers on legal subjects were Publius 
Mucius Scaevola (consul in 133 b. c.) and his brother 
Jurists Publius Licinius Crassus Mucianus (consul 

in 131 B. c.), but more important than either 
was Quintus Mucius Scaevola (consul in 95 b. c.), whose 
systematic treatment of Roman law served as the founda¬ 
tion for all later works on the subject. Quintus Scaevola 
was also distinguished as an orator. 

Throughout the period from the third Punic war to 


1 Lucius iElius PraBconinus Stilo, of Lanuviura, Stoic philosopher, 
philologist and rhetorician, was the first to give regular lessons in 
Latin literature and eloquence and to apply the historical method tc 
the study of the Latin language. He was born not far from 154 b. c., 
and lived well into the first century b. c. His contemporary, Quintus 
Valerius Soranus (from Sora), also wrote on Latin literature, the study 
of which was, in his case, joined with that of Roman antiquities. 
Volcacius Sedigitus, of whose personality nothing is known, wrote a 
didactic poem on the history of Latin literature about 90 b. c. Besides 
these, numerous works on grammar, philology, antiquities, agriculture, 
and other subjects were written by various authors, whose names are 
in many cases lost, but whose works served as quarries from which 
Varro and other writers derived their treasures of learning. 

Many prominent Romans played some part in the progress of litera¬ 
ture. So Publius Rutilius Rufus (born about 158 b. c., consul in 105, 
died about 75) studied the Stoic philosophy, published speeches, juris¬ 
tic writings, and an autobiography in Latin, and wrote a history in 
Greek, while Quintus Lutatius Catulus (born about 152 b. c., consul 
in 102, died in 87) published orations and epigrams. Among the 
letters written and published in this period none were more admired 
than those of Cornelia, mother of the Gracchi. 



THE TIME BEFORE CICERO 


45 


the dictatorship of Sulla—and, in fact, until the death of 
Cicero—nearly every public man at Rome was an orator, 
Oratory. an( l man y them published their speeches. 

In the times of the Gracchi, Rome contained, 
perhaps, more excellent speakers than at any other period, 
among whom none equalled in force, brilliancy and ora¬ 
torical power the great, though unsuccessful, statesman 
and patriot Gaius Gracchus (154-121 b. c.), who far sur¬ 
passed his elder brother Tiberius (163-133 b. c.) in elo¬ 
quence, though he, too, was an orator of distinction. 
After the Gracchi the most distinguished orators were 
Marcus Antonius (143-87 b. c.) and Lucius Licinius 
(140-91 B. c.), the first of whom excelled in vigor and 
liveliness of delivery, the second in wit, elegance and 
variety of composition. These orators were not merely 
men with natural ability to speak, but were carefully 
trained in accordance with the precepts of Greek 
rhetoric. 

Of all the works mentioned so far in this chapter, only 
one—Cato’s treatise On Agriculture —has come down to 
us entire, and only the satires of Lucilius 
are known to us by numerous fragments. 
The other works and their authors have left 
little more than their names. There is, however, one 
work, now usually ascribed to Cornificius, an author of 
whom nothing is known, which is preserved entire. This 
is the Rhetoric Addressed to Herennius , which 
Herennium^ was P reserve( ^ because it was falsely included 
among Cicero’s works. The treatise goes 
over much the same ground as Cicero’s youthful essay On 
Invention , which is evidently intended to be little more 
than a new and improved edition of the earlier work. 

The importance of the period immediately preceding 
the time of Cicero can not he judged by the extant litera¬ 
ture, but must be estimated by the number of works and 
authors mentioned by later writers and the qualities 


These works 
lost. 


46 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


assigned to them. It is at once evident that poetry made 
little progress, while prose writing of all kinds advanced 
Great with rapid strides. It is only natural, there- 

progress fore, that the age of Cicero should he the 

of prose. most brilliant period of Latin prose, and that 
the highest general development of poetry should be re¬ 
served for the Augustan age. Yet, even the Augustan 
age can only equal, not surpass, the immortal poems of 
two of Cicero’s contemporaries, Lucretius and Catullus. 


CHAPTER IV 


LUCRETIUS 


The Ciceronian period—Lucretius, 99 (?)-55 (?) b. c. —Philosophy 
at Rome—The poem of Lucretius—Its purpose, contents, and style. 

It was in the dictatorship of Sulla, 81 b. c., that Cicero 
made his first appearance as an orator, and almost from 
The ag-e of that time un til his death, in 43 b. c., he was 
Cicero a time the most prominent orator and man of let- 
of unrest. ters j n Rome. It is but right that in the 
history of literature this period of nearly forty years is 
called the age of Cicero. In political and external mat¬ 
ters this was a time of great unrest. Sulla’s dictator¬ 
ship, which seemed to put an end to strife, served only to 
strengthen the power of the senate, not to diminish its 
abuses; the increase of the slave population of Italy still 
continued to drive the freeborn farmers to Rome to swell 
the number of the city rabble; the slaves themselves 
broke out into open war; the provinces were discon¬ 
tented on account of the extortions of their governors; 
the Cilician pirates became so powerful that their sup¬ 
pression was a matter of some difficulty; Mithridates 
aroused a war in the east, and was overcome only by 
great exertion; while in Rome itself the conspiracy of 
Catiline and the struggle between Pompey and Caesar 
clearly foreshadowed the end of the republic. 

This period was at the same time one of great mate¬ 
rial prosperity at Rome. In spite of disturbing influences, 
wealth increased, interest in art and literature was wide- 

47 


48 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


spread, and there was, alongside of much vulgar extrava¬ 
gance and display, a steady growth in culture and refine- 
Wealth and ment - By the beginning of this period the 
culture. Latin language had become a proper medium 
Progress of of expression in prose and verse, though its 
literature. natural qualities of rigidity and precision 
made it always better adapted to the needs of the com¬ 
mander, orator, jurist, and historian than to the lighter 
and more varied uses of the poet. Among the poets of 
the time, some followed in the footsteps of Ennius, while 
others imitated the poems of the Alexandrian Greeks, 
characterized by mythological learning, elegance of exe¬ 
cution, and emptiness of contents. Of this latter school 
Catullus was the only one who rose to greatness, breathing 
into his verse the fire of poetic genius, while Lucretius 
stands out as the one great and commanding figure among 
the poets who continued the technical traditions of Ennius. 

Of the life of Lucretius little is known. Jerome, 
under the year 95 b. c., says : “ Titus Lucretius, the poet, 
was horn, who afterwards was made insane 
by a love potion, and, when he had in the 
intervals of his madness written several 
books, which Cicero corrected, killed himself by his own 
hand in the forty-fourth year of his age.” 1 Donatus, in 
his Life of Virgil , 2 says that Lucretius died on the day 
when Virgil was fifteen years old, i. e., October 15, 55 
b. c. This does not agree with the statement of Jerome. 
Cicero, in a letter written in February, 54 B. c., 3 mentions 
the poems of Lucretius, but says nothing about correct¬ 
ing or editing them. This is the only contemporary ref¬ 
erence to Lucretius or his work. Now the great poem of 
Lucretius was evidently never entirely finished by its 
author, who was therefore probably dead when Cicero 


Life of 
Lucretius. 


1 Jerome, in Eusebius’ Chronicle, year 1922 of Abraham, i. e., 95 b. c. 

2 Vita Vergilii, 2. 3 Ad Quintum Fratrem, II, xi, 4. 




LUCRETIUS 


49 


wrote this letter. The date (55 b. c.) for his death is thus 
corroborated. The date of his birth must remain uncer¬ 
tain, but it was probably not far from 99 b. c. Jerome’s 
statement that Lucretius was insane and committed sui¬ 
cide is not in itself improbable. His work shows him to 
have been a man of passionate and intense feelings, and 
gives some ground for the belief that in the course of his 
life he was subjected to great emotional strain. Of his 
friends and his daily life we know nothing. His poem is 
dedicated to Memmius, who is generally supposed to be the 
Gaius Memmius who was propraetor in Bithynia in 57 b. c. 

The only work of Lucretius is a didactic poem of six 
books, in hexameter verse, On the Nature of Things 
Philosophy (De Rerum Natura ), in which he expounds 
known to the the doctrines of Epicurus. The Romans had 
Romans. been for many years acquainted with Greek 
philosophical teachings, especially with those of the Stoic 
and Epicurean schools. The Stoic doctrines had been 
taught by one of the most eminent philosophers of the 
second century b. c., Pansetius, the friend of the younger 
Scipio Africanus, and were clearly congenial to the 
Roman temperament; for the Stoics taught that virtue is 
the highest good, that nothing else is worth striving for, 
and that the ordinary pleasures of life are mere interrup¬ 
tions of the philosopher’s peace. The Epicurean doc¬ 
trine, that pleasure is the highest good, was popular only 
with those who wished to devote themselves to selfish and 
physical enjoyment, for the higher aspects of the doc¬ 
trines of Epicurus were not understood. As early as 161 
B. c. tho senate had passed a vote banishing philosophers 
and rhetoricians from Rome, and six years later, when 
three famous philosophers—Diogenes the Stoic, Oritolaus 
the Peripatetic, and Carneades of the Academic school— 
came to Rome, they aroused so much interest that the 
senate decided to remove them from the city as soon as 
possible. Greek philosophy was, then, not a new thing at 


50 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


Rome, but the poem of Lucretius is the first systematic 
presentation of the Epicurean doctrines. 

The purpose of the poem is to free men from supersti¬ 
tion and the fear of death by teaching the doctrines of 
The reason Epicurus. This is a most serious purpose, 
for writing- and Lucretius is thoroughly in earnest. If 
in verse. j ie adopts the poetic form, it is in order to 

make his presentation of the doctrines more attractive, 
in the hope that it will thus have greater influence. 
This point of view, and at the same time the poet’s sense 
of the difficulty of his theme and his power to cope with 
it, is clearly expressed in the following passage: 

Come now, and what remaineth learn and hear 
More clearly. Well in my own mind I know 
The doctrine is obscure; but mighty hope 
Of praise has struck my heart with maddening wand, 

And with the blow implanted in my breast 
The sweet love of the Muses, filled with which 
I wander with fresh mind through pathless tracts 
Of the Pierides, untrod before 
By any mortal’s foot. ’Tis sweet to go 
To fountains new and drink ; and sweet it is 
To pluck new flow’rs and seek a garland thence 
For my own head, whence ne’er before a crown 
The Muses twined for any mortal’s brow. 

’Tis first because I teach of weighty things 
And guide my course to set the spirit free 
From superstition’s closely knotted bonds ; 

And next because concerning matters dark 

I write such lucid verses, touching all 

With th’ Muses’ grace. Then, too, because it seems 

Not without reason ; but as when men try 

In curing boys to give them bitter herbs, 

They touch the edges round about the cups 
With yellow liquid of the honey sweet, 

That children’s careless age may be deceived 
As far as to the lips, and meanwhile drink 
The juice of bitter herb, and though deceived 


LUCRETIUS 


51 


May not be harmed, but rather in such wise 
Gain health and strength, so I now,, since my theme 
Seems gloomy for the most part unto those 
To whom ’tis not familiar, and the crowd 
Shrinks back from it, have wished to treat for thee 
My theme with sweetly speaking poetry’s verse 
And touch it with the Muses’ honey sweet. 1 

The arrangement of the poem is as follows: Book i 
sets forth the atomic theory, invented by Democritus and 
Arrangement held. hy Epicurus, that the world consists of 
and contents atoms—infinitely small particles of matter— 
of the poem. an d Y oid, i. e., empty space. The theories of 
other Greek philosophers, such as Heraclitus, Empedocles, 
and Anaxagoras, are refuted. In Book ii it is explained 
how the atoms combine to form the various things in the 
world, because as they fall through space they depart 
from a straight line and come in contact with each other. 
It is also shown that the atoms, although infinite in num¬ 
ber, are limited in variety. In Book iii the mind and the 
soul, or principle of life, are shown to be material and to 
die when the body dies. Religion and the fear of death, 
which Lucretius regards as a result of religion, are attacked. 
Since the soul dies with the body, there is no reason to 
fear death, because after death we shall feel no lack of 
anything, shall have no troubles, but shall be as if we had 
not been born, or as if we lay wrapped in dreamless sleep: 

So death to us is naught, concerns us not, 

When the soul’s nature is as mortal known. 8 

Book iv shows how the impressions made upon our senses 
are caused by minute images detached from the objects 
about us. We see, for instance, because minute images 
of the object seen strike our eyes. Dreams and love are 
also treated in this book. In Book v the origin of the 
earth, sun, moon, and stars is described, the beginning of 


1 Book i, 921-947. 


2 iii, 830 f. 



52 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


Ethical 

doctrine. 


life is explained, and the progress of civilization, from the 
time when men were savages, is depicted. Some passages 
in this book anticipate in a measure the modern doctrine 
of the survival of the fittest. Since our world was not 
created, but came into being naturally by the combina¬ 
tions of atoms, it will also come to an end at some time 
by the separation of the atoms. In Book vi various 
striking phenomena are treated, such as thunder, light¬ 
ning, earthquakes, tempests, and volcanoes. The book 
ends with a description of the plague at Athens, derived 
from the account of Thucydides. 

Since the main purpose of the poem is to free men 
from religion and the fear of death by showing that all 
things, including the soul, came into being 
and are to pass away without any action of 
the gods, ethical doctrines are not systematic¬ 
ally treated. Lucretius accepts, however, the Epicurean 
dogma that pleasure is the chief good, “ the guide of 
life,” 1 but the pleasure he has in mind is not the common 
physical pleasure, but the calm repose of the philosopher: 

Oh wretched minds of men, oh blinded hearts! 

Within what shades of life aDd dangers great 
Is passed whate’er of age we have! Dost thou 
Not see that nature makes demand for naught 
Save this, that pain be absent from our frame, 

That she, removed from care at once and fear, 

May have her pleasure in the joys of mind? 2 

Again, in the splendid praise of Epicurus, which opens the 
fifth book, he says that we may live without grain or wine, 

But well one can not live without pure heart. 3 

The only Greek philosophers, besides Epicurus, of 
whom Lucretius speaks in terms of praise are Democritus, 
from whom Epicurus borrowed the atomic theory, and 


1 Book ii, 172. 


9 ii, 14 ff. 


3 v, 18. 



LUCRETIUS 


53 


Empedocles. Perhaps Lucretius imitates in his work the 
poem of Empedocles, which bore the same title. At any 
rate, Empedocles was a man of exalted modes of thought 
and dignified, poetic expression, qualities which would 
naturally awaken admiration in the mind of Lucretius. 
His reading- That Lucretius was well acquainted with the 
observation, great works of Greek literature and with the 
and love of writings of Naevius, Ennius, Pacuvius, Lucil- 
ius, and Accius, is evident from direct refer¬ 
ences to them or imitations of them. But he was not 
merely a student of books. His power of observation and 
his love of nature are shown in many passages, as where 
he describes the raging winds and rivers, 1 the life and 
motion of an army, 2 the striking features of the island of 
Sicily, 3 the echo in the mountains, 4 or pleasant repose 
under a shady tree on the grass by the river 
side. 5 

The poem opens with an invocation to 
Venus, which is justly famous. The first lines are: 


Two famous 
passag-es. 


Goddess from whom descends the race of Rome, 

Venus, of earth and heaven supreme delight, 

Hail, thou that all beneath the starry dome— 

Lands rich with grain and seas with navies white— 
Blessest and cherishest! Where thou dost come 
Enamelled earth decks her with posies bright 
To meet thy advent; clouds and tempests flee, 

And joyous light smiles over land and sea. 6 

Another famous passage is the beginning of Book ii, 
which has been translated into English hexameters as 
follows: 

Sweet, when the great sea’s water is stirred to its depth by the 
storm winds, 

Standing ashore to descry one afar off mightily struggling; 


1 Book i, 271-294. 2 ii, 323-832 and ii, 40-43. 3 i, 716-725. 

4 ii, 573-579. 6 ii, 29-33. 6 i, 1-9, translation by Goldwin Smith. 



54 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


Not that a neighbor’s sorrow to you yields dulcet enjoyment; 

But that the sight hath a sweetness, of ills ourselves are exempt 
from. 

Sweet ’tis too to behold, on a broad plain mustering war-hosts 
Arm them for some great battle, one’s self unscathed by the danger ,* 
Yet still happier this: To possess, impregnably guarded, 

Those calm heights of the sages which have for an origin Wisdom; 
Thence to survey our fellows, observe them this way and that way 
Wander amid Life’s paths, poor stragglers seeking a highway; 
Watch mind battle with mind, and escutcheon rival escutcheon; 
Gaze on that untold strife, which is waged ’neath the sun and the 
starlight, 

Up as they toil on the surface whereon rest Riches and Empire. 1 

Lucretius was perfectly aware that his subject was not 
an easy one to treat in verse, but was confident of his own 
power. His work shows that his confidence was justified. 
Yet even he could not, in explaining the details of the 
philosophy of Epicurus, move always in the upper realms 

of poetry. The result is that the poem is un- 

Style. x ... ,1.1,1 n 

even. In parts it rises to heights hardly at¬ 
tained by any other Latin author, but in other parts long 
passages are dull and monotonous. Yet even in these 
parts the verses have a serious, dignified music, the lan¬ 
guage is carefully chosen, and the subject is treated with 
consistency, clearness, and vigor. In the more animated 
portions of his work, Lucretius speaks almost like an in¬ 
spired prophet. His thought hurries his lines along with 
increasing impetus, until their flow seems almost irresist¬ 
ible. Strength, rapidity, and power are the most striking 
features of his style. Minor elements are frequent asso¬ 
nances of various kinds, such as alliteration, repetition, the 
use of two or more words from one root, and the like, elab¬ 
orate similes, and occasionally the form of direct address. 
With all these, the style is characterized by an austere 
dignity. 


1 Book ii, 1-13, translated by C. S. Calverley. 



LUCRETIUS 


55 


In his discussion of the development of the universe, 
and especially in the part dealing with living creatures, 
Anticipation man > and the progress of civilization, Lucretius 
of modem expresses conclusions not unlike some of those 
soience. reached in our own day by modern science. 

But his processes are not scientific. He reasons, to be 
sure, from concrete facts to theories and from theories 
again to concrete facts, but the method of his reasoning 
is unlike that of modern science. Lucretius, like other 
philosophers of ancient times, having once accepted a the¬ 
ory which explains certain phenomena, makes his theory 
the rule by which all phenomena are to be measured and in 
accordance with which they are to be understood. It is 
interesting to note that Lucretius, following Democritus 
and Epicurus, anticipates to a certain extent the modern 
atomic theory, the theories of the evolution of species, of 
the survival of the fittest, and of the continual progress 
of mankind from a condition of savagery to civilization, 
but his conclusions are reached, not by the patient toil of 
modern scientific research, but by abstract theorizing, to 
which his poetic imagination gives vividness and almost 
convincing power. 

The greatness of Lucretius as a poet has always been 
recognized by critical readers; but he has never been a 
popular author. His subject is too abstruse and his style 
too austere and dignified to appeal to the taste of the 
masses, which probably accounts for the fact that his poem 
has come down to us through only one copy, from which 
all the existing manuscripts are derived. 


5 


CHAPTER V 


CATULLUS-MINOR POETS 


Catullus, about 84-54 b. c. —His life—The book of poems—The 
longer poems—The shorter poems—Minor poets— Gnaeus Matius— 
Laevius — Sueius — Gaius Licinius Calvus, 87-47 b. c.— Gaius Helvius 
Cinna—Varro Atacinus, 82 to after 37 b. c. —Publius Valerius Cato 
—Marcus Furius Bibaculus—Gaius Memmius, propraetor in 57 b. c. 
—Ticidas—Quintus Cornificius—Cornelius Nepos— Marcus Tullius 
Cicero—Quintus Cicero. 


Life of 
Catullus 


The greatest lyric poet of the Ciceronian period is 
Gaius Valerius Catullus. The exact dates of his birth and 
death are uncertain. According to Jerome 
he was horn in 87 b. c., and died in 57 B. c., 
at the age of thirty years. But in one poem 1 
he refers to Pompey’s second consulship (55 B. c.), and in 
two others 2 he mentions Caesar’s expedition to Britain (55 
b. c.). It is therefore evident that his death can not have 
taken place in 57 b. c. But as his poems contain no refer¬ 
ences to any event later than 55 or 54 B. c., it is reason¬ 
ably certain that he died not much after the latter date. 
As he is known to have died young, his birth may be 
assigned to about 85 b. c., or perhaps a year or two later. 
His birthplace was Verona, and his family was wealthy 
and of good position. He went to Rome while still hardly 
more than a boy, and began to write love poems soon after 
taking the toga virilis , that is to say, at the age of seven¬ 
teen. Rome was then a brilliant capital, in which Greek 


1 c. cxiii, 1. 2. 

56 


2 cc. xi and xxix. 



CATULLUS 


57 


culture, with all its intellectual vivacity and all its vices, 
had taken firm root. The family connections of the young 
Catullus, whose father was a friend of Julius Caesar, intro¬ 
duced him to the aristocratic society of the capital, and 
his personal qualities doubtless contributed to make him 
a prominent figure among the gay youth of the city. 

About 61 B. c. began his passionate love for the bril¬ 
liant but dissolute woman whom he has immortalized in 
Lesbia P oems under the name of Lesbia. Her 

real name was Clodia, and when he met her 
she was the wife of Quintus Caecilius Metellus Celer. For 
a time she seemed at least to return the love of her young 
adorer, but almost immediately after her husband’s death, 
which took place in 59 b. c., she is reproached by Catullus 
for faithlessness. In the spring of 57 B. c., Catullus went 
to Bithynia as a member of the staff of the propraetor C. 
Memmius, and by this time his connection with Clodia 
seems to have been at an end. In the spring of 56 b. c,, 
Catullus returned to Rome, after visiting the tomb of his 
brother, who had died in the Troad. From this time on 
his poems are still in part poems of love, but they lack the 
passionate fire of the lines addressed to Lesbia. Most of 
the poems belonging to the last years of his life, when 
they contain personal allusions, are inspired rather by the 
political events of the time than by love. 

The poems of Catullus, as they have been handed 
down to us, form a small book of 2,280 lines. They are 
not arranged chronologically, but rather ac- 
Poems°° k ° f cor( ^ n g contents and style. The first sixty 
are short poems in various lyric metres, and 
have to do with the poet’s love, with his friends and 
enemies, and with the experiences of his life. These are 
followed by seven longer poems in imitation of Alex¬ 
andrian originals, and the rest of the collection consists of 
short pieces, all in elegiac verse. This arrangement is 
doubtless due to some editor, not to Catullus himself, but 


58 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


gives the book a certain artistic unity which would be 
lacking if the poems were arranged in chronological order. 
A few quotations from Catullus which can not he identified 
with passages in the extant poems are found in the works 
of other writers, but they are so few as to indicate that 
nearly all he ever wrote is contained in the existing book. 

In the longer poems Catullus shows himself a con¬ 
summate master of language and versification and a skill¬ 
ful imitator of the Alexandrian poetry most 
epithalamia P°P u l ar among the younger literary men of 
his time. The first epithalamium, or wedding 
song, composed for the marriage of Manlius Torquatus 
and Vinia Arunculeia, is written in lyric metre of short 
lines. It is supposed to be sung as the bride is escorted 
to her new home, the first part by a chorus of maidens, 
the second by youths. Such songs were traditional among 
the Greeks as well as among the Romans, and there is 
little originality in the subject or its general treatment, 
but the brilliant versification and the charming tender 
passages it contains make this the most attractive of all 
the longer poems of Catullus. The second epithalamium, 
in hexameter verse, was apparently composed for no 
special occasion. A chorus of youths and a chorus of 
maidens sing responses, calling upon Hymenaeus, the god 
of marriage, and describing by allusion the passage of the 
bride from maidenhood to wifehood. So the maidens 
compare her to a flower that has grown in a secluded 
garden, and the youths compare her to a vine that twines 
about an elm. 

The third of the longer poems, the sixty-third of the 
whole collection, is the only existing Latin poem in the 
difficult and complicated galliambic metre. It describes 
the madness of the youth Attis, who mutilates himself and 
gives himself up to the service of the goddess Cybebe. 
The despair of Attis when he recovers from his madness 
and yearns for his country, his friends, and his past happi- 


CATULLUS 


59 


ness, is depicted with admirable power, and the ecstatic 
worship of Cybebe is most vividly portrayed. The longest 
poem of all describes in hexameter verse the 
lonVpoems. marriage of Peleus with the sea-goddess The¬ 
tis. This is not in any sense a lyric poem, 
but an epyllion, or little epic. It contains passages of 
great beauty, but offers little opportunity for the display 
of the peculiarly lyric genius of Catullus, and is, on the 
whole, the least successful of his poems. This is followed 
by The Lock of Berenice , a translation of a poem of the 
same name by the Alexandrian Callimachus. Queen Bere¬ 
nice had cut off a lock of her hair in accordance with a 
vow when her husband returned safe from war. The lock 
disappeared from the temple in which it had been offered, 
and the astronomer Conon discovered it as a new constel¬ 
lation in the heavens. The lock of hair is supposed to 
speak and to yearn for its former place upon the forehead 
of the queen. In the preface to this poem, which is ad¬ 
dressed to the orator Hortensius Hortalus, Catullus speaks 
in beautiful lines of the death of his brother: 

Oh, is thy voice forever hushed and still ? 

Oh, brother, dearer far than life, shall I 
Behold thee never ? But in sooth I will 
Forever love tbee, as in days gone by : 

And ever through my songs shall ring a cry 
Sad with thy death, sad as in thickest shade 
Of intertangled boughs the melody, 

Which by the woful Daulian bird is made, 

Sobbing for Itys dead her wail through all the glade . 1 

The Lock of Berenice is followed by a conversation with 
a door, which hints at several immoral stories. The last 
of the longer poems is an elegy on the death of the poet’s 
brother, joined with the praises of his friend M\ Allius 
and of his beloved. This poem is remarkable for the 


1 Translated by Theodore Martin. 



60 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


number of digressions it contains, and in this, as in its 
general tone, it is an imitation of the Alexandrian style. 

The seven poems just described contain many beautiful 

passages, but they show us Catullus chiefly as the learned, 

skillful, and successful imitator of Alexandrian Greek 

models. His real genius appears in the shorter poems, 

which deal with the feelings of his own heart. 

The short j n ^Rese a ] so h e j g an imitator, so far as his 
poems. 

metres are concerned, but the feelings are his 
own, and he expresses them in words that burn. No 
translation can do justice to the sharp, quick strokes of 
his invectives or to the passionate outpourings of his love. 
One of his favorite metres is the “ hendecasyllable ” or 
eleven syllable verse, which, by its quick movement, helps 
to create an impression of great swiftness of thought and 
flashing outbursts of emotion. At the same time, the 
numerous diminutive suffixes employed give a light and 
graceful, almost playful, tone to the verse. Some of the 
lines directed against those whom Catullus hated or de¬ 
spised, are scurrilous and indecent; but that is the fault 
of the age rather than of the poet himself. In general 
the thoughts and emotions expressed range from passion¬ 
ate love to violent invective, while through many of the 
poems there runs a vein of half satirical playfulness. 
Some of the qualities of Catullus’ poetry may be made 
clear by translations of a few of the short poems. The 
first shows at once his passionate love for Lesbia, and 
something of his half-satirical humor: 

My Lesbia, let us live and love, 

Nor let us count it worth above 

A single farthing if the old 

And carping greybeards choose tc scold. 

The suns that set and fade away 
May rise again another day. 

When once has set our little light 
We needs must sleep one endless night. 


CATULLUS 


61 


A thousand kisses give me, then 
A hundred, then a thousand, when 
I bid you give a hundred more ; 

When many thousands o’er and o’er 
We’ve kissed, we’ll mix them, so that we 
Shall lose the count, and none shall be 
Aroused to evil envious hate 
Through knowing that the sum’s so great . 1 

A well-known and especially attractive poem is the 
playful lament for the sparrow: 

Let mourning fill the realms of Love ; 

Wail, men below and Powers above! 

The joy of my beloved has fled, 

The Sparrow of her heart is dead— 

The Sparrow that she used to prize 
As dearly as her own bright eyes. 

As knows a girl her mother well, 

So knew the pretty bird my belle, 

And ever hopping, chirping round, 

*Far from her lap was never found. 

Now wings it to that gloomy bourne 
From which no travellers return. 

Accurs’d be thou, infernal lair! 

Devourer dark of all things fair, 

The rarest bird to thee is gone ; 

Take thou once more my malison. 

How swollen and red with weeping, see, 

My fair one’s eyes, and all through thee . 3 

Like most educated Romans, Catullus had a great love 
for the country. His joy in returning to his country seat 
on the peninsula of Sirmio forms the subject of a charm¬ 
ing little poem: 

Gem of all isthmuses and isles that lie, 

Fresh or salt water’s children, in clear lake 
Or ampler ocean; with what joy do I 

Approach thee, Sirmio! Oh! am I awake, 


1 c. v. 


2 c. iii. Translated by Goldwin Smith in Bay-Leaves. 



<32 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


Or dream that once again mine eye beholds 
Thee, and has looked its last on Thracian wolds ? 

Sweetest of sweets to me that pastime seems, 
When the mind drops her burden, when—the pain 
Of travel past—our own cot we regain, 

And nestle on the pillow of our dreams! 

’Tis this one thought that cheers us as we roam. 
Hail, O fair Sirmio! Joy, thy lord is here! 

Joy too, ye waters of the Golden Mere! 

And ring out, all ye laughter-peals of home! 1 


Of the lesser poets of the Ciceronian period little need 
be said. Their works are lost, but for scattered frag¬ 
ments, except in so far as a few anonymous poems are to 
be ascribed to this period. The writers of mimes, Deci- 
mus Laberius and Publilius Syrus, have already been men- 
Matius, tioned (p. 30). Gnaeus Matius, who appears 
Laevius, to belong to this time, wrote mimiambics in 
Sueius. mann er of Herondas and other Alexan¬ 

drian poets—lively reproductions of scenes of ordinary 
life—in choliambic verse, that is, iambic trimetres, the 
last foot of which is a spondee; Laevius wrote sportive 
love-poems ( Erotopcegnia ); and Sueius composed idylls, 
two of which, the Moretum and the Pulli , are known by 
name, besides a book of annals. Matius also made a free 
translation of Homer’s Iliad. 

More important in their own day were two friends of 
Catullus, Gaius Licinius Calvus and Gaius Helvius Cinna. 

Calvus, who lived from 87 to 47 b. c., was a 
distinguished orator and politician, who de¬ 
voted his leisure hours to poetry. His poems 
included epithalamia, elegies, epigrams, and at least one 
mythological epyllion, entitled Io. Cinna appears to have 
come, like Catullus, from northern Italy, but of his life 
little is known beyond the fact that he was with Catullus 
on the staff of Memmius in Bithynia. His chief work was 


Calvus and 
Cinna. 


1 c. xxxi. Translated by C. S. Calveiiey. 



MINOR POETS 


63 


Varro 

Atacinus. 


a poem entitled Smyrna, which, although it was of mod¬ 
erate length, occupied him for nine years. The subject 
was the unnatural love of the maiden Smyrna for her 
father and the birth of their son Adonis. The poem was 
so learned and obscure as to be almost incomprehensible, 
and was similar in this respect to the Alexandra of the 
Alexandrian Lycophron. The admiration expressed by 
Catullus for this work shows how highly the younger Ro¬ 
man poets esteemed successful imitations of even the worst 
faults of their Alexandrian models. 

A poet who continued the national traditions of En¬ 
nius and also imitated the Alexandrians was Publius Te- 
rentius Varro, called Varro Atacinus. He was 
born at Atax, in Gallia Narbonensis, in 82 
B. c. He wrote a poem in hexameters on Cae¬ 
sar’s war with the Sequani, and some satires, probably in 
the manner of Lucilius. In his thirty-fifth year he is 
said to have turned to the study of the Greek poets, and 
it is probably about this time that he translated into Latin 
hexameters the Argonautica of the Alexandrian epic poet 
Apollotiius Rhodius. A geographical poem, probably en¬ 
titled Chorographia , and a series of elegiac poems in the 
Alexandrian manner probably belong to the time after the 
year 37 b. c. The few fragments of his poems show that 
he was a poet of more than ordinary gifts. 

The intellectual leader of the school of poets who 
found their inspiration in the works of the Alexandrians 
was the grammarian and teacher, P. Valerius 
Cato, whom Furius Bibaculus calls “ Cato 
the grammarian, the Latin Siren, who alone 
reads and makes poets.” Cato’s influence was exerted to 
lead his followers to imitate their Greek models carefully, 
to perfect their Latin style, and probably to introduce the 
new metres into Latin poetry. His own writings were 
grammatical treatises, poems, and a revision and correc¬ 
tion of the works of Lucilius. The poem entitled Dirce, 


Valerius 

Cato. 


64 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


which is contained in manuscripts of Virgil, and really 
consists of two distinct poems, Dirce and Lydia , has been 
ascribed with some probability to Cato. In the first poem 
the writer curses a veteran named Lycurgus, who has de¬ 
prived him of his property and his beloved Lydia ; in the 
second he addresses a touching farewell to Lydia, who has 
remained in the country. Other poets of this period are 
Other oets -^ ur * us Bibaculus, who wrote satirical 

verses, Gaius Memmius, the propraetor of 
Bithynia in 57 b. c., Ticidas, Quintus Cornificius, and Cor¬ 
nelius Nepos—all of whom belonged to the new school 
and imitated the Alexandrians. Nepos we shall meet 
again among the prose writers. Others also, whose chief 
activity was in other fields, wrote poetry occasionally. 
Among these Cicero and his brother Quintus may be men¬ 
tioned. 

The names of these lesser poets are of little impor¬ 
tance to us, but it is worth while to mention them to call 
attention to the fact that poetry was cultivated by many 
of the younger men in the Ciceronian period. Through 
their efforts the various styles and metres of the Greek 
poets, especially those of the Alexandrian period, were 
made familiar to the Romans, and thus the way was pre¬ 
pared for Horace, Virgil, and Ovid in the Augustan age. 







CICERO. 

Bust in the Vatican Museum, Rome, 




CHAPTER VI 


CICERO 

Cicero, 106-43 b. c. —His importance—His life—Periods of his lit¬ 
erary activity—His works—The orations—Philosophical works—Let¬ 
ters—His character. 

Marcus Tullius Cicero, orator, statesman, and phi¬ 
losopher, is the great commanding figure of the literary 
period which is designated by his name. With him Latin 
prose reaches a height never before attained and never 
afterward surpassed. The cooler and more 
oMJicero 106 critical judgment of our northern natures 
and later age may find his eloquence too ex¬ 
uberant, and our scholars, trained in the study of the Greek 
philosophers, may deny him the title of an original thinker, 
but no one can fail to appreciate the power of his utter¬ 
ance, the clearness of his exposition, or the lucid elegance 
of his diction. He found the Latin language the chief 
dialect of Italy, the speech of a great and mighty city; he 
made it the language of the world for centuries. 

To write the life of Cicero in all the known details 
would be to write the history of Rome during the entire 
period of his manhood. The historian of literature must 
content himself with a mere sketch. Cicero was born at 
Education Arpinum, a small town in the hills of eastern 

and early Latium, on the third of January, 106 b. c. 

years. The town was also the birthplace of Marius, 

whose fame no doubt fired the imagination of the young 
Cicero and helped to rouse his ambition. His father de- 

65 


66 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


termined to give him the best possible education and sent 
him to Rome, where he knew the two great orators, M. 
Antonius and L. Crassus, and also the aged M. Accius and 
the Greek poet Archias. Since legal knowledge was a 
necessary part of an orator’s education, he studied with the 
jurist Q. Scaevola (p. 44), and the Augur of the same name. 
He also paid attention to philosophy, studying with the 
Epicurean Phaedrus, the Academic philosopher Philo, who 
was a pupil of Clitomachus, and the Stoic Diodotus. 
His teacher of rhetoric was Molo, of Rhodes, and he also 
received instruction from the rhetorician M. Antonius 
Gnipho and the actors Roscius and iEsopus. He acquired 
a great reputation as an advocate by several speeches, 
especially by his defense of Quinctius (81 b. c.) and Ros¬ 
cius of Ameria (80 b. c.); but his health failed, and at the 
same time he wished to perfect his education. He there¬ 
fore left Rome and spent two years (79-77 B. c.) in Greece 
and Asia. At Athens he studied under the Academic 
Antiochus, the Epicurean Zeno, his old teacher Phaedrus, 
and the instructor in oratory, Demetrius. In Asia he be¬ 
came acquainted with the florid Asian style of eloquence, 
and at Rhodes he studied again under his former teacher 
Molo, who exerted himself to chasten the exuberance of 
ids style, which had been encouraged by the Asiatic ora¬ 
tors. At Rhodes he also became acquainted with the 
famous Stoic Posidonius. 

In 77 b. c. he returned to Rome and continued his 
career as an orator. It was soon after his return that he 
married Terentia, a lady of noble birth, with 
career. ltlCa whom he lived for thirty-two years. In 75 
B. c. he began his official career as quaestor 
of Lilybaeum in Sicily, an office which he filled with great 
credit. He was elected aedile in 69 and praetor in 66 b. c. 
In 63 b. c. he was chosen consul, with Antonius as his col¬ 
league, and truthfully claimed that, although he was a 
novus homo , a man wlio had no family influence or prestige 


CICERO 


67 


to aid him, he had obtained each of the important offices 
of the state at the earliest legally admissible age. In 
The his consulship the conspiracy of Catiline oc- 

conspiracy curred, which Cicero suppressed with relent- 
of Catiline. less v jg 0rj although it was supposed to be 
favored by some of the most powerful men in Rome, in¬ 
cluding Crassus and Caesar. The conspirators were not 
sentenced to death by regular legal process, but the sen¬ 
ate decreed that the consul should defend the safety of 
the state, and Cicero gave the order for their execution. 
To this year belong the four speeches against Catiline. 

In 60 b. c. the first triumvirate was formed. The 
triumvirs found the influence of Cicero unfavorable to 
their plans, and encouraged his enemy, P. 
banishment Clodius Pulcher, who had been adopted into 
a plebeian family and been elected tribune of 
the people, to propose a bill that any one who had put a Ro¬ 
man citizen to death without due process of law be ban¬ 
ished. Cicero, finding that he could not defend himself 
with success, withdrew from Rome, and his banishment was 
decreed. He remained in exile from April, 58 b. c., until 
August, 57 b. c., when he was recalled and received with 
great honors. 

In 53 b. c. he was elected to fill the place in the col¬ 
lege of augurs made vacant by the death of the younger 
Crassus. In 51 and 50 b. c. Cicero was again 
absent from Rome, as proconsul of Cilicia. 
On his return he found Caesar and Pompey in 
open strife. Cicero had never been a party man. He was 
always a sincere patriot, full of pride in the glorious past 
of his country, and more than ready to do his duty, and 
now, when he could not fail to see that both parties were 
ruled by selfish ambition rather than by disinterested pa¬ 
triotism, it was hard for him to attach himself to either. 
After some hesitation, he joined the party of Pompey and 
the senate, and, in 49 b. c., followed Pompey to Epirus, 


His later 
years. 


68 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


but was not present at the battle of Pharsalus. After 
Pompey’s defeat he waited at Brundusium until Caesar al¬ 
lowed him to return to Rome in 47 b. c. Here he lived in 
retirement, devoting himself to literary pursuits. In 46 
b. c. he divorced his wife, Terentia, and married his young 
ward, Publilia, from whom he parted the following year. 
The year 45 b. c. was saddened by the death of his only 
daughter, Tullia. The death of Caesar, in 44 B. c., recalled 
Cicero for a short time to public life, but he seems to have 
left the city in April and to have spent some months at his 
various villas. In July he decided to visit Athens, where 
his son was studying, but after he had reached Sicily he 
heard that he was needed at Rome, gave up his plan, and 
returned to the capital. Here he took a leading part in 
the opposition to Antony, against whom he delivered the 
fourteen orations known as the Philippics. When the 
triumvirs came to terms with one another, Cicero was in¬ 
cluded by Antony among those whose death he demanded. 
His death After moving first to Tusculum, and then to 
Formiae, he went aboard a ship at Caeta, but 
turned back to land, resolved to die in his native country. 
On his way between his villa and the sea he was overtaken 
by a party of Antony’s soldiers and killed, on the seventh 
of December, 43 b. c. His head and hands were cut off 
and exposed upon the rostra in the Roman forum. 

Cicero’s oratorical and literary activity falls naturally 
into four chronological divisions: his earlier years, to the 
Periods of beginning of his career as a political orator 

Cicero’s (81-66 b. c.); the period of his greatest pow- 

literary er, lasting until just before his banishment 
(66-59 b. c.); from his return from banish¬ 
ment until his departure for Cilicia (57-51 B. c.); and 
from his return from Cilicia until his death (50-43 b. c.). 

To the first period belong several speeches delivered in 
different kinds of lawsuits, the most remarkable of which 
are the seven orations in the suit against Verres (70 b. c.) 


CICERO 


69 


The first 
period. 


for extortion and misgovernment in Sicily. At the ear¬ 
nest request of the Sicilians, Cicero undertook the prose¬ 
cution. The first speech, the Divinatio in 
Ccecilium , was delivered to determine wheth¬ 
er Cicero or Q. Csecilius Mger, who had 
been quaestor under Yerres in Sicily, should conduct the 
prosecution. The first speech in the prosecution itself 
settled the case. Cicero had prepared all the evidence 
and summoned the witnesses, and instead of giving the 
defence an opportunity for delay, brought forward his 
overwhelming evidence at the beginning, after a mere in¬ 
troduction. Hortensius, Yerres’ advocate, gave up the 
defence after hearing the evidence, and Yerres was ban¬ 
ished. The five remaining orations, called the Actio S& 
cunda in Verrem , were published by Cicero in order that 
the facts might be universally known, but were never de¬ 
livered in court. They show not only that Cicero was at 
this time a consummate master of eloquence, but also that 
his diligence in the collection and preparation of his ma¬ 
terial was remarkable. In addition to his speeches, Cicero 
wrote in this period several translations from the Greek, 
which are lost, and also a handbook of oratory, the De 
Inventions, in two books. This work was written when 
the author was only twenty years old, and is based upon 
the treatise addressed to Herennius (p. 45). In it Cicero 
treats of the various divisions of oratory and their uses. 
The work is greatly inferior to his later rhetorical writings. 

The second period opens with the superb oration For 
the Manilian Law or De Imperio Gncei Pompei (66 b. c.), 
in which Cicero advocates the appointment 
of Pompey with extraordinary powers to carry 
on the war against Mithridates. The four 
brilliant and vehement speeches Against Catiline belong 
to the year of Cicero’s consulship, 63 b. c. To the same 
year belongs the witty and able speech For Murccna, in 
which Cicero defends M^rama ^inst a charge of bribery. 


The second 
period. 


TO 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


The delightful speech For the Poet Archias was delivered 
in 62 b. c. in support of the poet’s claim to the Roman 
citizenship. Throughout this period Cicero’s time and 
energy were so fully occupied with affairs of state and 
with the suits in which he was engaged as to leave him 
little leisure for purely literary production. In 60 B. c., 
however, when the troubles that led to his banishment 
were thickening about him, he made a metrical version of 
the astronomical poems of Aratus, portions of which are 
preserved in his later work On the Nature of the Gods , 
and wrote a poem in three books On His Consulship , 
which is lost. 

The speeches of the third period were delivered for 
the most part in private cases, though one of them, On the 
Consular Provinces (b. c. 56), urging that 
period ild Caesar retain his proconsulship of Gaul and 
that Gabinius and Piso be recalled from Syria 
and Macedonia, is political, while political considerations 
have an important place in several others. In the year 55 
b. c. the dialogue On the Orator (Be Oratore) was written, 
in which the two great orators of the generation before 
Cicero, Lucius Crassus and Marcus Antonius, discuss the 
proper qualities of an orator. The dialogue is supposed 
to have taken place shortly before the death of Crassus 
(91 b. c.). The lesser parts are taken by some of the 
younger statesmen of the day, and in the beginning 
Cicero’s teacher, the augur Scaevola, appears. This 
is one of the most attractive of Cicero’s works. The 
technical discussions are enlivened by anecdotes and con¬ 
versation, and the whole dialogue has a grace and spright¬ 
liness not often found in Latin prose. The dialogue On 
the State (Be Re Publica ), in six books, was published 
before 51 b. c. Only about one third of this is preserved 
in a fragmentary condition, and for many centuries the 
entire work was lost with the exception of the Bream of 
Scipio (Somnium Scipionis ), from the sixth book. The 


CICERO 


71 


discussion of the state was followed by a dialogue On Laws 
(De Legibus), which was begun apparently in 52 b. c., but 
was never finished. In this period we find Cicero turning 
his attention to technical works on rhetoric and also to 
philosophy. 

The last period was for the most part a time of quiet 
literary work for Cicero. Only after Caesar’s death did he 
return to public life. In 46 b. c. he thanked 
period. Caesar, in the oration For Marcellus , for al¬ 

lowing Marcellus, who had been consul in 
51 b. c., to return to Rome; later in the same year he 
pleaded the case of Quintus Ligarius in the speech For 
Ligarius, and in 45 b. c. he spoke in behalf of Deiotarus, 
tetrarch of Galicia, who had been accused of treachery to 
Caesar (ForKing Deiotarus), but these are the only speeches 
of this period except the fourteen Philippics , directed 
against Antony, all of which belong to the short time 
between the second of September, 44 b. c., and the 
twenty-second of April, 43 B. c. In these Cicero shows his 
old energy and fire, but not quite his earlier power. The 
name Philippics was given to these speeches almost from 
the very first, and was in fact authorized by Cicero him¬ 
self, who welcomed the parallel between himself, arousing 
and encouraging the Romans against Antony, and Demos¬ 
thenes urging the Athenians to oppose Philip. But these 
orations were the work of a few months; by far the greater 
part of the years after 50 B. c. was occupied with other 
things. In the three years 46-44 b. c. appeared the rhetor¬ 
ical writings Brutus , the Orator , the Divisions of Oratory , 
the essay On the Best Kind of Orators , and the long series 
Rhetorioal phil° s °phi ca l dialogues and treatises, the 

an d most important of which are the De Finibus 

philosophical Bonorum et Malorum , a discussion of the dif- 
works. ferent theories respecting the highest good, 

in five books; the Academics , two books of which are pre¬ 
served ; the Tusculan Disputations , in five books, treating 
6 


72 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


of the chief essentials for happiness; the treatise On the 
Nature of the Gods , in three books; and the three books 
On Duties (De Officiis ), to which should he added, on 
account of their beauty of style and sentiment, the Cato 
Maior (On Old Age) and the Lcelius (On Friendship). 

Cicero’s extant works comprise fifty-seven orations and 
fragments of twenty more, seven rhetorical treatises, thir¬ 
teen philosophical treatises, including those On the State 
and On Laws, and about eight hundred and sixty letters, 
among which are ninety addressed to him by his corre¬ 
spondents. Among the lost works are a few historical 
writings and several translations from the Greek. 

Cicero’s chief ambition was to he a great orator, and he 
spared no pains to attain his end. Richly endowed by 
nature, he was not content to employ his 
natural gifts without careful cultivation. He 
studied the orators of earlier times, especially 
the great masters of Greek eloquence, made many transla¬ 
tions from the Greek for the sake of perfecting his style, 
and was a diligent student of rhetorical theories. His 
conception of the proper qualities of the orator was high 
and noble. In the essay De Oratore , he makes Crassus say: 


Cicero as an 
orator. 


Wherefore, if one wishes to define and embrace the proper 
power of an orator in all its extent, that man will be, in my opinion, 
an orator worthy of this great name, who can speak wisely, in an 
orderly and polished manner, from memory, and even with 
some dignity of action, upon whatever subject arises that needs to 
be set forth in speech. 1 


And again: 

I assert that by the moderation and wisdom of the perfect 
orator not only his own dignity, but the welfare of very many 
persons and of the entire commonwealth is preserved. 9 

In short, the orator should be, in Cicero’s opinion, not 
only a great and practised speaker, but a man of varied 


1 De Oratore, i, 15, 64. 


8 Ibid., i, 8, 34. 



CICERO 


73 


learning, and at the same time a man of the highest char¬ 
acter. This was the ideal he set before himself and strove 
throughout his life to attain. Certainly it was no low 
ideal, nor was the man who strove to attain it a character 
to be despised. 

Cicero’s oratorical style is always careful and finished, 
but is far from that monotonous smoothness which study 
Q t i often gives to the speech of those who are not 
style. hy nature gifted orators. In the narrative 

parts of his speeches he is clear, straightfor¬ 
ward, and lucid; in his arguments he is logical, in¬ 
cisive, and full of force; in his appeals to the feelings of 
his hearers he is vivid, quick and powerful, sometimes, 
according to the demands of the occasion, violent or 
pathetic. The elaborate periodic structure of his sen¬ 
tences is varied by many short questions or exclamations, 
and the habitual dignity of his utterance is softened and 
enlivened by frequent touches of wit, humor, 
and irony. So in his defence of Quintus 
Ligarius, who had served in the senatorial army in Africa, 
although he knew that Caesar, before whom the case was 
argued, was perfectly acquainted with the facts, he began 
his speech as follows : 


Irony. 


A new charge, Gaius Caesar, and one never heard of before this 
day, my relative, Quintus Tubero, has brought before you: that 
Quintus Ligarius was in Africa; and Gaius Pansa, a man of excel¬ 
lent character, trusting, perhaps, in his friendship with you, has 
dared to confess that it is true. Therefore I know not where to turn. 
For I had come prepared, since you could not know it by yourself, 
and could not have heard it from any one else, to take advantage 
of your ignorance for the salvation of the unfortunate man. 1 


After this ironical introduction, which serves to make 
his opponents seem ridiculous, Cicero appeals to Caesar’s 
well-known clemency before proceeding to his argument. 


1 Pro Ligario, t 



74 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


Patriotic 

feeling. 


In his own political life Cicero constantly showed his 
reverence for the dignity of the Roman people, the estab¬ 
lished forms of government, and the tradi¬ 
tions and great deeds of the earlier days of 
Rome. The same feeling is evident in nearly 
all his orations. References to the Roman people, the 
majesty of the Roman people, the Roman empire, the dig¬ 
nity of the senate, the customs or institutions of the an¬ 
cestors, are found on almost every page. The oration On 
the Manilian Law is not merely a panegyric of Pompey 
and an argument for giving him new and greater powers, 
but at the same time a hymn of praise to the glory of the 
Roman republic and the virtues of the men of old: 


Our ancestors often engaged in wars because our merchants or 
ship-owners had been somewhat unjustly treated ; what, pray, 
should be your feelings when so many thousands of Roman citi¬ 
zens have been slaughtered by one edict and at one time ? Be¬ 
cause our envoys had been too haughtily addressed it pleased your 
fathers that Corinth, the light of all Greece, be blotted out; will 
you let that king go unpunished who has slain an ex-consul and 
envoy of the Roman people, after subjecting him to imprisonment, 
and scourging, and all kinds of torture ? They did not endure it 
when the liberty of Roman citizens was curtailed; will you be 
negligent when their lives have been taken ? They followed up 
the verbal violation of the right of embassies; will you desert the 
cause of an ambassador slain with all torments ? Be on your guard, 
lest, just as it was most honorable for them to hand down to you 
so great and glorious an empire, so it be most disgraceful for you 
to fail to guard and preserve what you have received. 1 


Here the orator’s effort is to arouse his hearers to main¬ 
tain the dignity and glory of the republic, whose greatness 
is brought home to their minds by the references to the 
deeds of their ancestors. This passage is also a good ex¬ 
ample of the effective use of repeated contrasts. 

In the speech For the Manilian Law Cicero addresses 


1 Pro Lege Manilla, 5, 11. 




CICERO 


75 


the assembled Roman people on a political question of 
immediate and great importance. His tone is exalted 
and earnest, his eloquence stirring and inspiring. The 
same qualities are found in all the political orations, and 
in many of the private speeches, delivered in cases in¬ 
volving the life of the accused or Cicero’s own character. 
Gentler I n speeches dealing with less urgent matters 

and more the tone is more gentle and the effect more 

graoeful graceful. Quotations from the poets are nu¬ 
merous, and the rhythmical structure of the 
sentences is more marked than in the stirring and excited 
passages of the political harangues. The oration For the 
Poet Archias is the best example of Cicero’s less stirring 
and more graceful oratory. After establishing by a brief 
statement the fact that Archias had a valid claim to the 
citizenship, Cicero devotes the remainder of his speech to 
the praise of literary pursuits : 

These studies nourish youth, delight old age, adorn prosperity, 
furnish a refuge and solace in adversity, gladden us at home, are 
no hindrance abroad, spend the nights with us, are with us in our 
foreign travels, and at our country seats. 1 

In this oration Cicero appears as the man of letters 
whose literary interest was not bounded by the career of 
the politician or the orator, and who, in spite of political 
successes and disappointments, was to achieve greater 
fame as an author than any other writer of Latin prose. 

Few passages are more striking or characteristic in 
the orations of Cicero than those in which he turns to 
address directly either the opposing party in 
the case or his advocate. In these passages, 
which vary in length from a brief exclama¬ 
tion to an elaborate invective, the stinging words shoot 
forth with quick and passionate directness. One of the 
longer passages of this kind, in which additional force is 


Direct 

address. 


1 Pro Archia Poet a, 7, 16. 




76 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


lent to the words by the suggestion that they are uttered 
by the culprit’s own father, is the following : 

Here you will even dare to say, “ Among the judges, that one 
is my friend, that one a friend of my father.” Is not every one, 
the more closely he is connected with you in any way, the more 
ashamed of you for being subject to a charge of this kind ? He is 
your father’s friend. If your father himself were a judge, what, 
in the name of the immortal gods, could you do when he said to 
you: “You, the praetor of the Roman people in a province, when 
you had to carry on a naval war, excused the Mamertines for three 
years from supplying the ship which they were bound by treaty 
to supply; for your private use a freight ship of the largest size 
was built at public expense by those same Mamertines; you ex¬ 
acted money from the cities under the pretext of the fleet; you dis¬ 
missed rowers for bribes; you, when a pirate vessel had been cap¬ 
tured by the quaestor and the lieutenant, removed the leader of 
the pirates from the sight of all; you could put under the heads¬ 
man’s axe men who were said to be Roman citizens, who were 
known as such by many; you dared to take pirates to your house, 
and to bring the pirate captain to the court from your own dwelling; 
you, in that splendid province, in the sight of our most faithful 
allies, of most honorable Roman citizens, lay for days together on 
the shore at festive banquets at a time when the province was in 
fear and danger; during those days no one could find you at your 
house, no one could see you in the forum; you brought to those 
banquets the wives of allies and friends; among women of that 
sort you placed your youthful son, my grandson, that his father’s 
life might offer him examples of wickedness at the age which is 
especially unsteady and lacking in fixed principles; you, the prae¬ 
tor, were seen in the province in a tunic and purple cloak; you, for 
the gratification of your passion and lust, took away the command 
of the ships from a lieutenant of the Roman people and gave it to 
a Syracusan; your soldiers in the province of Sicily were in want of 
food and grain; owing to your luxury and avarice a fleet of the 
Roman people was captured and burned by pirates; in your prse- 
torship pirates sailed their ships in that harbor which no enemy 
had ever entered since the foundation of Syracuse; and these dis¬ 
graces of yours, so many and so great, you did not care to hide by 
concealment on your part, nor by making men forget them and 


CICERO 


77 


keep silent about them, but you tore away to death and torture even 
the captains of the ships, without any cause, from the embraces of 
their parents, your own friends, nor in seeing the grief and tears 
of those parents did any memory of me soften you; to you the 
blood of innocent men was not only a pleasure, but even a source 
of profit. ” If your father should say this to you, could you ask 
pardon from him ? could you entreat him to forgive you ? 1 

These few examples, perhaps not the most striking to 
be found in the great body of his orations, may give some 
idea of the variety of Cicero’s oratory. In his youth the 
Roman orators were divided into two parties on the 
question of style; the elder men, chief among whom was 
Hortensius, favored the Asian style, with its wealth of 
rhetorical adornment, while the younger men, the Atticists, 
as they called themselves, aimed at extreme simplicity, 
taking Lysias as their model. Cicero perceived that a 
middle course was best. His natural tendency was toward 
exuberance, but he tempered it by careful study. He 
does not avoid rhetorical adornment, but he seldom uses 
it to excess. Like Demosthenes, whom he regarded as 
the greatest of the Greek orators, he varies his style to 
suit the occasion, and, like him, he stands forth as the 
greatest orator of his nation. 

In his philosophical writings Cicero’s purpose was to 
be useful to his fellow citizens by making them acquainted 
with the results of Greek speculative thought. 

Philosophical As he himself says: 
works. J 

As I sought and pondered much and long by 
what means I could be of use to as many men as possible, that I 
might never cease to care for the welfare of the republic, nothing 
greater occurred to me than if I should make accessible to my fellow 
citizens the paths of the noblest learning. 2 

With this end in view he wrote his treatises, for the 
most part in the dialogue form, after the manner of Plato, 
in which he set forth the doctrines of the Greek philoso- 


1 In Verrem, ii, v, 52. 


2 JJe Divinatione y ii, 1. 




78 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


phers on the most important subjects, such as the chief 
end of life, the means of attaining happiness, duty, the 
nature of the gods, and the like, laying the chief stress 
upon what he believed to be true and correct. He lays no 
claim to great originality of thought, but only to inde¬ 
pendence of judgment. In general, he regards himself as 
a disciple of the Academic school, which did not claim to 
establish absolute truth, but to show what was most 
probable. He uses, however, the works of Stoic and even 
of Epicurean philosophers, whenever they express views 
in accordance with his own, as well as when he wishes to 
refute their teachings. He is not entirely consistent in 
all his writings, but his high moral sense, his belief in the 
divine government of the world, and his hope of im¬ 
mortality are the foundations of his philosophy. His 
style in these writings is, as befits his subject, dignified 
and serene, but enlivened by the occasional interruptions 
incident to the dialogue form. 

To the professional student of ancient philosophy these 
treatises are of great importance chiefly because of the 
Importance information they contain concerning the 
of Cicero’s writings and doctrines of Greek philoso- 
phiiosophicai pliers whose works have been lost; to the 
works. student of literature they offer admirable 

examples of learned works in popular form, with all the 
charm of exquisite literary workmanship; and their in¬ 
fluence upon later ages was so great that no one who 
is interested in the progress of human thought can dis¬ 
regard them. St. Augustine, and many other writers of 
the early Christian Church, acknowledge their indebted¬ 
ness to them; they are the foundation of the specula¬ 
tive thought of the middle ages ; and it is in great meas¬ 
ure due to their influence that the Latin language has 
remained, almost to our own day, the great medium for 
the expression of philosophical and scientific speculation. 
Cicero made “ the paths of the noblest learning ” acces- 


CICERO 


79 


sible not only to his Roman fellow citizens, but to count¬ 
less generations of men of all lands. His noble purpose 
was accomplished more grandly than he ever hoped or 
dreamed. Let those who will, accuse him of shallowness 
and superficiality; mankind owes him an immeasurable 
debt of gratitude. 

Cicero’s orations have served as models for many gen¬ 
erations of orators, his rhetorical treatises may be re¬ 
garded as the foundation of nearly all later theories of 
style, his philosophical works exerted an influence which 
permeated the thought of centuries. It remains to speak 
of his letters. These are in some respects 
letters. the mos ^ interesting of his writings, because 

they show the feelings of the man as he 
disclosed them to his intimate friends, they make us ac¬ 
quainted with the personal relations between the promi¬ 
nent Romans of the time, and shed many rays of light 
upon the dark pages of contemporary history. The first 
of the extant letters is dated in 68 B. c., the last July 28, 
43 b. c. The collection was made by Cicero’s friends, and 
edited probably by his freedman, Tiro, and his publisher 
and most intimate friend, Atticus. They fall into four 
groups; sixteen books addressed to various persons {Ad 
Familiares), three books to Cicero’s brother Quintus {Ad 
Quintum Fratrem ), sixteen books to Atticus {Ad Atticum), 
and two books to Brutus {Ad Brutum). There were 
originally nine books of letters to Brutus, but only the 
eighth and the ninth are preserved. 

The letters differ greatly in importance, in length, and 
in interest. Some are mere greetings or brief introduc¬ 
tions, while others are carefully composed treatises; some 
are expressions of Cicero’s inmost feelings to his inti¬ 
mate friends, while others are business notes or occasional 
letters to men with whom he was on a less familiar foot¬ 
ing; some are addressed to the great leaders of the po¬ 
litical parties, others to comparatively obscure persons; 


80 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


some are on literary subjects, others on private business, 
and still others on matters that pertain to the history of 
the world. The style and language vary with 
8(mtents° f the contents of the letters, but are in gen¬ 
eral less careful than in any of Cicero’s other 
writings. The language is evidently that of common 
speech rather than of literary composition. In the letters 
written during his exile Cicero betrays unmanly discour¬ 
agement, and breaks out into pitiful lamentation, just as 
in many of his orations he betrays great vanity, and extols 
overmuch his own courage and patriotism in the matter of 
the Catilinarian conspiracy ; but these letters are the con¬ 
fidential utterances of momentary feelings, not the delib¬ 
erate expressions of the man’s character, and we must 
not forget that Cicero was an Italian, a man of easily 
aroused emotions, whose vanity might overflow or whose 
grief might break forth without affecting his real earnest¬ 
ness or steadfastness. One of the briefer letters to Atti- 
cus is the following, written from Thurium, in April, 58 
b. c., soon after Cicero’s banishment began: 

Terentia thanks you frequently and very warmly. That is a 
great comfort to me. I am the most miserable man alive, and am 
being worn out with the most poignant sorrow. I don’t know 
what to write to you. For if you are at Rome, it is now too late 
for me to reach you; but if you are on the road, we shall discuss 
together all that needs to be discussed when you have overtaken 
me. All I ask you is to retain the same affection for me, since it 
was always myself you loved. For I am still the same man; my 
enemies have taken what was mine, they have not taken myself. 
Take care of your health. 1 

A letter to Marcus Terentius Yarro, written in 46 
B. c., among the troubles of the civil war, shows Cicero 
consoling himself with literature : 

From a letter of yours, which Atticus read to me, I learnt 
what you were doing and where you were; but when we were 


1 Ep. ad Atticum , iii, 5, Shuckburgh’s translation. 



CICERO 


81 


/ikely to see you, I could gain no idea at all from the letter. How¬ 
ever, I am beginning to hope that your arrival is not far off. I 
wish it could be any consolation to me! But the fact is, I am 
overwhelmed by so many and such grave anxieties, that no one 
but the most utter fool ought to expect any alleviation; yet, after 
all, perhaps you can give me some kind of help, or I you. For 
allow me to tell you that, since my arrival in the city, I have 
effected a reconciliation with my old friends—I mean my books; 
though the truth is that I had not abandoned their society because 
I had fallen out with them, but because I was half ashamed to look 
them in the face. For I thought, when I plunged into the mael¬ 
strom of civil strife, with allies whom I had the worst possible rea¬ 
son for trusting, that I had not shown proper respect for their 
precepts. They pardon me; they recall me to our old intimacy, 
and you, they say, have been wiser than I for never having left it. 
Wherefore, since I find them reconciled, I seem bound to hope, if 
I once see you, that I shall pass through with ease both what is 
weighing me down now, and what is threatening. Therefore, in 
your company, whether you choose it to be in your Tusculan or 
Cuman villa, or, which I should like least, at Rome, so long only 
as we are together, I will certainly contrive that both of us shall 
think it the most agreeable place possible. 1 


Cicero’s 

character. 


Cicero’s letters give us a more complete insight into 
his private character than could be gained from his other 
writings. He was a faithful and affectionate 
friend, a genial companion, a good husband 
and father, and a devoted patriot. In his 
political career he exhibited a lack of that insight which 
enables the great statesman to foresee inevitable changes, 
and therefore he strove to preserve the old system of gov¬ 
ernment at a time when its usefulness had passed away. 
He could not sympathize thoroughly with Pompey and 
his party, still less with the revolutionary policy of Caesar. 
The result was indecision and apparent fickleness, but his 
indecision was not so much that of weakness as of the 
inability to choose between what he must have regarded 


1 Ep. ad Familiares, ix, 1, Shuckburgh’s translation. 



82 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


as two evils. When he saw his duty clearly before him, 
as in the year of his consulship, he did not flinch, and 
again, when Antony was arrayed in arms against the state, 
he stood forth boldly as the defender of the republic. He 
showed his courage and firmness also when, in 50 B. c., 
after Pompey’s flight from Italy, he exposed himself to 
Caesar’s displeasure by refusing to come to Rome except 
as an avowed partizan of Pompey. 1 In all the relations 
of life he was honorable and conscientious, and in the 
field of literature he stands among the great men of the 
world. 


1 Ep. ad Atticum, ix, 18. 














CHAPTER VII 


CLESAR—SALLUST—OTHER PROSE WRITERS 


Caesar, 102 C?)-44 b. c. —Hirtius, f-43 b. c. —Oppius, died after 44 
b. c.—Continuations of Caesar’s Commentaries—Sallust, 86-35 b. c.— 
Cornelius Nepos, before 100 b. c. to after 30 b. c. —Yarro, 116-27 b. c. 
—Atticus, 109-32 b. c. —Hortensius, 114-50 b. c. —Calidius, died 47 
b. c.—Calvus, 87-47 b. c. —Brutus, 78 (?)—42 b. c. —Cornificius, ?-41 
b. c. —Quintus Cicero, 102-43, b. c. —Tiro—Nigidius Figulus, died 45 
b. c.—Aurelius Opilius—Antonius Gnipho—Pompilius Andronicus— 
Santra—Servius Sulpicius Rufus. 


What has been said of Cicero applies with at least 
equal force to Caesar—the story of his life belongs to the 
history of Rome rather than to that of literature. We 
must therefore content ourselves with a brief sketch. 

Graius Julius Caesar was born, according to the common 
account, in 100 b. c., but the real date is probably two 
years earlier. He was of patrician birth, and 

Caesar’s 

early life hi s family claimed descent from Ascanius, or 
lulus, the son of iEneas. Marius, his uncle 
by marriage, made him a priest of Jupiter at the age of 
not more than fifteen. While still little more than a boy 
he married Cornelia, the daughter of Cinna, and barely 
escaped the proscription of Sulla when he refused to 
divorce her. The young Caesar was thus, in spite of his 
patrician birth, identified with the popular party. In 67 
b. c. he was quaestor in Farther Spain, in 65 B. c. he be¬ 
came curule aedile, in which office he distinguished him¬ 
self by the magnificence of his public games and exhi¬ 
bitions, and in 63 b. c. he was elected pontifex maximus, 

83 


84 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


thereby becoming for life the official head of the Roman 
religion. 

In 62 B. c. he was chosen praetor, and the next year 
was sent as propraetor to Farther Spain. Up to this time 
His govern- h e was known chiefly as a dissolute man and 
mentin an unscrupulous demagogue. His extrava- 
Spain. gance had involved him in debts amounting 

to more than a million dollars. But in the government 
of his province he distinguished himself by military suc¬ 
cesses and excellent civil administration, besides amassing 
sufficient wealth to pay his debts. 

In 60 b. c. he returned to Rome, and soon formed with 
Pompey and Crassus the agreement known as the first 
triumvirate, by which he was assured of the 
triumvirate consulship in 59 b. c., and the government 
of Gaul for the following five years. To 
strengthen the alliance he married his young and beauti¬ 
ful daughter Julia to Pompey. In 56 b. c. he met Pompey 
and Crassus at Lucca, in the presence of a great concourse 
of senators and their followers, and an agreement was 
made that Caesar should continue to hold the province of 
Gaul through 49 b. c., while Pompey and Crassus were to 
be consuls in 55 b. c., after which Syria and Spain were to 
be given to Crassus and Pompey respectively for five 
years. The agreement was duly carried out, and in 54 b. c. 
Crassus went to Syria, where he lost his life after the 
battle of Carrhae, in 53 b. c. In the same year Pompey’s 
wife, Julia, died. Pompey had not gone to Spain to take 
possession of his province, but remained at Rome, and 
soon became openly hostile to Caesar. When the Gallic 
war was ended, the senatorial party, with Pompey at its 
head, demanded that Caesar disband his army. This he 
The civil war re ^ use ^ to do un less Pompey also gave up his 
military command. Hereupon the civil war 
broke out, Caesar crossed the Rubicon, the boundary of 
his province, and Pompey fled to Greece, where he was 


CiESAR 


85 


defeated in 48 b. c., at Pharsalus, then to Egypt, where 
he was murdered. In 46 b. c. the senatorial party was 
finally defeated in the battle of Thapsus, in Africa, and 
their leader, Cato, committed suicide at Utica. 

Caesar now returned to Eome, where he was made 
imperator and perpetual dictator, thus uniting in one 
Csesar’s person all the political power of the state, 
dictatorship Henceforth the forms of republican govern- 
and death. ment were but a thin mask disguising a real 
monarchy. In the brief period of his power Caesar accom¬ 
plished the reform of the calendar, and carried through 
numerous important changes for the improvement of the 
government, but nothing could placate the hatred of 
those who wished to restore the rule of the senate, what¬ 
ever its abuses had been. On the Ides of March (March 
15), 44 b. c., he was murdered in the senate-house by a 
band of conspirators headed by Brutus. 

Caesar’s extant writings are seven books of Commen¬ 
taries on the Gallic War, covering the years 58-52 B. c., 
and three books of Commentaries on the Civil 
writings War, covering the years 49-48 B. c. He also 
wrote some poems, a book On the Stars , two 
books Against Cato , and a few grammatical or rhetorical 
essays, all of which are lost, as are also his orations, which 
were greatly admired. Collections of his letters existed 
in antiquity, but these also have been lost, and the only 
extant letters of Caesar are a few which are preserved in 
the correspondence of Cicero. Caesar doubtless intended 
to publish commentaries on the years between 52 and 49 
B. c., as well as on his wars in Egypt and elsewhere, but 
did not carry out his intention. 

Caesar’s Commentaries on the Gallic War were written 
apparently in the year 51 b. c., when he was still on good 
terms with Pompey. The energy of this pale, slender, 
delicate man sufficed not only to make him the conqueror 
of the warlike tribes of the north, and afterward of the 


86 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


trained armies of the republic, but also to gain him an 
eminent position among the great narrative and descrip¬ 
tive writers of the world. The Commentaries were written 
rapidly, 1 for the double purpose of showing what Caesar had 
done to increase the glory and power of Rome, and to prove 
to his detractors that his conquest of Gaul had not been an 
act of unprovoked aggression, but had been forced upon 
him by circumstances. The facts narrated are drawn, in 
all probability, from the official army records, supplement¬ 
ed from Caesar’s own recollections, and perhaps from his 
private journals. In striking contrast to the transparent 
vanity which led Cicero to extol his own merits on all 
possible occasions, Caesar keeps his personality in the 
background, and writes of himself always in the third 
person, as if the deeds he narrates were those of another 
than the writer. This gives his narrative the appearance 
of great impartiality, but the careful reader can hardly 
fail to notice that Caesar’s conduct is always put in the 
most favorable light, that his victories are made as impor¬ 
tant as possible, and his. reverses are more lightly passed 
over. The Commentaries are not to be regarded as accu¬ 
rate history, but rather as a justification of Caesar’s actions, 
presented in historical form. 

Caesar’s style is clear, simple, and unaffected, and free 
from all obtrusive rhetorical adornment, but the narrative 
of his campaigns is varied and enlivened by 
Btyte 8 i nser fi° n of descriptions, speeches, dia¬ 

logues, and all sorts of interesting details. He 
frequently takes occasion to signalize the brave deeds of 
his men. So in his account of the siege of Gergovia, he 
describes the heroic death of one of his centurions: 

Marcus Petronius, a centurion of the same legion, in trying 
to break down the gate, was overwhelmed by numbers and de¬ 
spaired of his life. When he had already been wounded many 


1 Hirtius, Be Bello Gallico , viii, 1. 



HIRTIUS 


87 


times, he said to his comrades, who had followed him: “Since I 
can not save myself together with you, I will at least provide for 
your safety, since through my greed for glory I have led you 
into danger. When an opportunity is given you, do you look out 
for yourselves.” At once he rushed into the midst of the enemy, 
and after killing two, drove the rest a little away from the gate! 
When his comrades tried to succour him, “In vain,” he said, “do 
you try to save my life, since my blood and my strength are ebbing 
away. So go away, while you have the opportunity, and retreat 
to the legion.” Thus fighting he soon fell and saved his com¬ 
rades. 

The history of the Gallic war was published under the 
unassuming title of Commentarii , or “ notes ”; but such is 
the perfection of its simple style that no one ever thought 
of rewriting it. 

The three books of Commentaries on the Civil War 
show the same qualities as those On the Gallic War , but in 

The Civil a ^ ess a( ^ m ^ ra ^ e degree. In one external 

War matter they differ from the history of the 

Gallic War, for in the latter each book con¬ 
tains the account of a year’s campaign, while the story 
of the first year of the Civil War occupies two books. 
The historical interest of this work is at least as great 
as that of the books on the Gallic War, but it does not 
compete with them in literary merit, and contains some 
positive misstatements. Probably the work was written in 
haste and was never revised by its author. This supposi¬ 
tion would account for some of its defects. It may have 
been prepared for publication by one of Caesar’s officers, 
perhaps by one of those who undertook to furnish histories 
of the campaigns which Caesar had left unrecorded. 

Among those who continued Caesar’s record of his wars, 
the best writer is Aulus Hirtius. He was one of Caesar’s 
lieutenants in Gaul, and was sent by him to Rome as a 
trusted agent. In 49 b. c. he was with Caesar in Rome. 
What share he had in the civil war is not known, but he 
himself says that he was not present in the Alexandrian 
7 


88 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


Continua¬ 
tions of 
Caesar’s 
Commenta¬ 
ries. 


and African wars. He was praetor, on Caesar’s nomination, 
in 46 B. c., and was consul in 43 b. c., when he was killed 
in the battle of Mutina, fighting against An¬ 
tony. The only work ascribed to him with 
certainty is the eighth book of the Commenta¬ 
ries on the Gallic War , in which he shows him¬ 
self far inferior to Caesar as a writer, but not 
without some ability. The book is well written, in a style 
evidently intended to resemble that of Caesar. Whether 
the book on the Alexandrian War was written by Hirtius 
or by Gaius Oppius is uncertain. Oppius was a man of 
equestrian rank, a supporter and agent of Caesar at 
Rome. After Caesar’s death he attached himself to the 
party of Octavius, and urged Cicero to do the same. He 
appears not to have lived long after 44 B. c. The Alexan¬ 
drian War is written in a style similar to that of the 
eighth book of the Gallic War. The books on the 
African War and the Spanish War are by unknown au¬ 
thors. The style of the first is tasteless and turgid, while 
that of the latter is hesitating and crabbed. These books 
possess a certain literary interest, because they show the 
immense difference between Caesar’s literary ability and 
that of the average Roman of his day. 

Caesar’s inimitable Commentaries are the records of 
their author’s own deeds, written from the point of view of 
the chief actor in the events narrated. They are not the 
results of wide historical research, nor do they attempt to 
give the reader a broad general knowledge of the course 
of events, with all their causes and consequences. They 
are not, strictly speaking, history, but a masterly presen¬ 
tation of the material from which history is made. The 
earlier records of the past by Roman writers, such as Va¬ 
lerius Antias, Cornelius Sisenna, and others (see page 43), 
were mere annals, deficient alike in careful research and 
literary finish. The first real historian of Rome was 
Sallust. 


SALLUST 


89 


Gaius Sallustius Crispus was born of a plebeian family, 
at Amiternum, in the Sabine country, in 86 B. c. At some 
Sallust unknown date he obtained the office of quaes¬ 

tor, and in 52 b. c. he was tribune. In the 
earlier part of his life he was dissolute, and he is said to 
have brought his father in sorrow to the grave. In 50 B. c. 
he was expelled from the senate by the censors Appius 
Claudius and Lucius Piso. In the following year he was 
reappointed quaestor by Caesar and thus regained his place 
in the senate. In 48 B. c. he was in command of a legion in 
Illyria, in the year following he was sent by Caesar to sup¬ 
press a mutiny among the soldiers in Campania, and in 46 
b. c. served as praetor in the African war. At the end of 
the year he was made proconsul of Numidia, where he 
enriched himself by plundering the province. He then 
bought a villa and gardens on the Quirinal, and devoted 
himself to historical writing until his death in 35 B. c. 

Sallust’s works are The Conspiracy of Catiline , The 
Jugurthine War , and the Histories . The first two are 
preserved entire, but of the Histories, which 
treated of the events from 78 to 67 b. c., 
only fragments are preserved, in addition 
to four speeches and two letters, which were inserted 
in the narrative, but were collected and published for 
use in rhetorical teaching. The two letters to Caesar 
and the speech against Cicero, published under the name 


Sallust’s 

works. 


of Sallust, are spurious. 

In his writings Sallust appears as an opponent of 
the nobility and a champion of the popular party. He 
Character of depicts in glaring colors the corruption and 
Sallust’s greed of the senate, and describes in glowing 

works. terms the successes and virtues of the popu¬ 

lar hero Marius. At times his political bias leads him 
even to distort the truth, though the distortion is not so 
great as to deprive his works of historical value. He is 
not content to state the bare facts of history, but exerts 


90 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


himself to depict the sentiments and motives underlying 
the actions of the chief persons about whom he writes, 
and even of mankind in general. He prefaces his nar¬ 
rative with introductions of a philosophical nature, some¬ 
times not strictly relevant to the subject in hand. His 
style is rhetorical and piquant, and he uses many archaic 
words, chosen in great part from Cato’s works. He 
evidently imitates the style of Thucydides, and, like 
him, he introduces speeches and letters composed to 
suit the occasion on which they are supposed to have 
been delivered or written. These peculiarities give his 
works the interest of individuality, and have caused them 
to be much admired, and also severely criticised, in an¬ 
cient and modern times. Some of the qualities of Sallust’s 
writing may appear in translations of a few brief extracts. 
The opening words of the Catiline are as follows: 

All men, who desire to excel the other animals, ought to strive 
with all their power not to pass their lives in silence, like the 
cattle which nature has made prone and obedient to their appetite. 
But all our power is situated in the spirit and the body; our spirit 
is more for command, our body for obedience; the one we have in 
common with the gods, the other with the beasts; wherefore it 
seems to me more fitting to seek glory by the resources of the 
mind than by physical strength, and, since the life which we 
enjoy is itself brief, to make the memory of us as lasting as 
possible. 1 

His account of the terror at Rome when the greatness 
of the danger from the conspiracy of Catiline became 
known, shows his power of vivid description: 

By these things the state was deeply moved and the face of 
the city was changed. From the greatest gaiety and wantonness, 
which long peace had brought forth, suddenly utter sadness came 
in; people hurried, ran trembling about, had no confidence in any 
place or man, neither waged war, nor were at peace; each one 
measured the danger by his own fear.® 


1 Catiline , 1. 


2 Ibid., 31. 



CORNELIUS NEPOS 


91 


The beginning of the speech of Marius to the Romans 
exhibits Sallust’s rhetorical style, his liking for antitheses 
and for descriptive epithets : 


I know, Quirites, that not by the same conduct do most men 
seek power from you and use it after they have obtained it, that 
at first they are industrious, humble, and moderate, but afterward 
pass their lives in sloth and haughtiness. But to me the opposite 
seems right, for by as much as the entire state is more impor¬ 
tant than the consulship or the prsetorship, with so much greater 
care ought the former to be administered than these latter to 
be sought. Nor am I ignorant how much trouble I am taking 
upon myself at the same time with the greatest honor from you. 
To make ready for war, and at the same time spare the treasury, 
to force to military service those whom one does not wish to 
offend, to care for everything at home and abroad, and to do this 
among envious, opposing, seditious men, is harder, Quirites, than 
you think. 


Artificial though the style of Sallust is, it is interest¬ 
ing, lively, often concise and vivid. It had no little influ¬ 
ence upon the style of subsequent writers, especially 
upon that of Tacitus, the greatest of Roman historians. 
We must remember, too, that the Catiline and the Jugur- 
tha were of much less importance than the lost Histories. 
In this greater and more mature work Sallust may have 
avoided some of the faults of style that appear in the 
extant treatises. 

A much less interesting writer than Sallust is Corne¬ 
lius Nepos. Like Catullus and several other authors of 
this period, he came to Rome from the north. 
Nepos^ US His birthplace was probably Ticinum, on the 
river Po. Little is known of his life, which 
appears to have extended from a little before 100 b. c. to 
a little after 30 b. c. He was a friend of Catullus and of 
Cicero’s friend Atticus, probably also of other literary 
men at Rome. His works were all, with the exception 
of some love poems, historical and biographical. The 
Chronica , in three books, treating of universal history, 


92 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


was probably written before 52 b. c. The Exempla , in 
five books, was a history of Roman manners and customs. 
Three other works were a Life of Cato (the elder), a Life 
of Cicero , and a treatise on geography. His latest work, 
published apparently between 35 and 33 B. c., was a great 
collection of biographies of distinguished men ( De Viris 
Illustrious ), dedicated to Atticus. An addition to the 
life of Atticus was made between 31 and 27 B. c. This 
work contained at least sixteen books, and was divided 
into sections of two books each, so that each section con¬ 
tained one book on Romans and one on foreigners. The 
sections treated of Kings, Generals, Statesmen, Orators, 
Poets, Philosophers, Historians, and Grammarians. 

Of all the works of Nepos, there remain to us only the 
book on foreign generals, and from the book on Roman 
Qualities of historians the lives of Cato the elder and of 
the works of Atticus, besides fragments of the letters of 
Nepos. Cornelia, mother of the Gracchi. The book 

on foreign generals contains biographies of twenty Greek 
generals, a brief sketch of kings who were also gen¬ 
erals, and biographies of Hamilcar and Hannibal. Nepos 
draws his facts from good sources, such as Thucydides, 
Xenophon, Theopompus, Polybius, and the writings of 
Hannibal, but is careless and uncritical, and does not 
employ all the important sources of information on each 
subject. He makes mistakes in matters of history and 
geography, arranges his material badly, and gives to 
trivial anecdotes the space that might better have been 
devoted to more important matters. His style, though 
generally clear, is without elegance. The structure of 
his sentences is simple, and his subject-matter is interest¬ 
ing. For these reasons, rather than on account of any 
literary merit, his Lives have been much used as a text¬ 
book for beginners in Latin. 

One of the most productive and learned writers of the 
age of Cicero was Marcus Terentius Yarro, who was born 


VARRO 


93 


Varro. 


in 116 B. c. at Reate, in the Sabine country. He studied 
at Rome under Lucius HSlius Stilo, and at Athens un¬ 
der Antiochus of Ascalon. In 76 b. c. he 
was in the army in Spain, in 67 b. c. he dis¬ 
tinguished himself in the war against the pirates. Per¬ 
haps he continued to serve under Pompey in the war 
with Mithridates. In the civil war he was on the side 
of Pompey, and was forced to surrender to Caesar the 
legion under his command. He was afterward in Epirus, 
at Corcyra, and at Dyrrhachium. After Caesar’s victory, 
Varro accepted the new government and was placed in 
charge of the public libraries. He was proscribed by 
Antony after Caesar’s death, but his life was saved 
through the devotion of his friends, and he spent his 
remaining years in peace, continuing his literary activity 
until the end. He died in his ninetieth year, 27 B. c. 

Varro’s works were many and varied. Some seventy- 
four titles are known, and the total number of single 
books amounted to about six hundred and 
twenty. These included poems, works on 
grammar, history, geography, law, rhetoric, 
philosophy, mathematics, literary history and education, 
miscellaneous essays, orations, and letters. Of all these 
there remain one complete work, On Agriculture ( De Re 
Rustica), in three books, six (v-x) of the original twenty- 
five books of the treatise On the Latin Language (De 
Lingua Latina ), numerous short fragments of the Menip- 
pean Satires (Saturce Menippece), and a few fragments of 
some of the other works. The collection of maxims that 
passes under Varro’s name is probably spurious. 

Varro’s The Menippean Satires were written in 

extant prose interspersed with verses, in imitation 

works. 0 f the WO rks of the Cynic Menippus, who 

lived about 300 B. c., and probably belong to Varro’s 
earlier years. They treat of almost all the relations 
of human life in a satirical vein. The extant verses 


Varro’s 

works. 


94 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


show some ability in metrical composition and no little 
humor. It is evident, however, that Yarro was not a 
great poet, and the loss of his other poems is little to be 
regretted. The three books On Agriculture give, in the 
form of a dialogue, a systematic treatment of agriculture 
proper, of stock-raising, and of poultry, game, and fish. 
The dialogue is stiff, and the arrangement of the different 
parts of the subject artificial. The work is valuable for 
the information it contains, but its literary form is unat¬ 
tractive. The extant books of the treatise On the Latin 
Language are chiefly concerned with the derivation of 
words and with inflections. Syntax was treated in books 
xiv-xxv. Varro’s etymologies are often incorrect, and his 
ideas concerning inflections unscientific; but the work 
contains much that is of value to the student of the Latin 
language and of Roman antiquities. The style is dry and 
often dull. In fact, this is hardly a work of literature, 
but rather a technical treatise. Varro was a man of great 
learning and prodigious industry, but not a literary artist. 
The Among his lost works the most important 

Antiquitates were probably the Human and Divine Anti- 
and the quities (Antiquitates Rerum Divinarum Hu - 
imagines. manarumque ), in forty-one books, and the Por¬ 
traits ( Hebdomades , or Imagines ), in fifteen books. The 
latter work contained brief accounts in prose and verse of 
seven hundred famous Greeks and Romans, with their 
portraits. Varro’s works were vast treasure-houses of in¬ 
formation, but there is no reason to suppose that they 
possessed any great literary qualities. 

The remaining prose writers of this period may be 
passed over with a brief mention. Many of them are 
little more than names to us, and the works 
of all are lost. One of the most interesting 
is Titus Pomponius Atticus (109-32 b. c.), whose biography 
was written by Cornelius Xepos. He was a wealthy man, 
who abstained from public life and devoted himself to 


Atticus. 


MINOR PROSE WRITERS 


95 


Minor 

orators. 


literature by publishing the works of others and giving 
friendly aid to literary men as well as by writing. His 
friendship with Cicero has already been mentioned. His 
works were historical, the most important being the 
Annals (Liber Annalis ), a chronological sketch of Roman 
history from the foundation of the city to the year 49 b. c. 
His other works were biographies or genealogies, and de¬ 
scriptive verses written to accompany portraits of dis¬ 
tinguished men. 

The orator Quintus Hortensius Hortalus (114-50 b. c.) 
is chiefly known through Cicero. He was the advocate 
of Yerres when Cicero conducted the prose¬ 
cution, he spoke against the Manilian Law, 
which Cicero supported, and in several suits 
he was engaged by the same client who secured Cicero’s 
services. Hortensius was the chief representative of the 
florid and ornamental “ Asian ” style of oratory at Rome. 
Among the orators who adopted the simple Attic style, 
the most important were Marcus Calidius, who was prae¬ 
tor in 57 B. c. and died in 47 B. c.; Gaius Licinius Calvus 
(87-47 B. c.), who has been mentioned above (page 62) as 
a poet; Marcus Junius Brutus, the leader of the conspira¬ 
tors who murdered Caesar; and Quintus Cornificius, who 
was also a poet (see page 64). 

Quintus Tullius Cicero (102-43 b. c.), the brother of 
Marcus, was also a literary man, though far inferior to his 
brother. When he was Caesar’s lieutenant in 
Cicero 18 Gaud* in 54 B. c., he wrote several tragedies, 
apparently translations from the Greek, and 
he was also the author of annals and of an epic poem on 
Caesar’s expedition to Britain. The only writings of 
Quintus Cicero now existing are three letters to Tiro and 
one to Marcus Cicero, besides an Essay on Candidature for 
the Consulship, in the form of a letter to Marcus, written 
when he was a candidate for that office in 64 B. c. This gives 
some interesting information about the methods of Roman 


96 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


politicians, but has little literary interest. The first of Mar¬ 
cus Cicero’s Letters to Quintus is a similar treatise on the 
government of a province, written when Quintus was 
beginning his third year as propraetor of Asia, 59 B. c. 

Another writer closely connected with Cicero 
was his freed man and friend Tiro, who wrote 
Cicero’s biography, made editions of his speeches and 
letters, and collected his witticisms, besides writing on 
grammar and inventing a system of shorthand. 

The grammatical, theological, and scientific works of 
Publius Nigidius Figulus, who was praetor in 58 B. c., and 
Writers on died i n banishment in 45 B. c., have little 
special to do with literature, and are lost. Nor is 

subjects. it necessary to devote even a brief space to 

the grammatical and rhetorical works of Aurelius Opi- 
lius, Antonius Gnipho, Marcus Pompilius Andronicus, 
and others, whose teachings helped to inform some of the 
great writers and orators of the time, but whose works 
have not been preserved. A philologist, historian, and 
poet, whose writings were considered important, was 
Santra, who seems to have been somewhat younger than 
Yarro, but we are now unable to determine wherein their 
importance consisted. Among the jurists of this period 
the most distinguished was Servius Sulpicius Rufus, two 
letters from whom are preserved in Cicero’s correspond¬ 
ence (Ad Familiar es, iv, 5, and iv, 12). These give a high 
idea of his style, but are the only remains of his writings. 
All branches of knowledge, so far as they existed at that 
time, were treated by various writers, but a discussion of 
their lost works has no place in a brief history of literature. 

The last years of the republic are made illustrious by 
the great names of Lucretius, Catullus, Cicero, and Caesar. 
In the Augustan age, poetry attained a still greater height 
of perfection with Virgil and Horace, but the age of Cicero 
is the golden age of Latin prose. 


BOOK II 


THE AUG VST AH PERIOD 


CHAPTEE VIII 

THE PATRONS OF LITERATURE—VIRGIL 

Effect of the Empire upon literature—Augustus, 63 b. c.-14 a. d. 
—Agrippa, 63-12 b. c. —Pollio, 67 b. c.-5 a. d. —Messalla, 64 b. c.- 
8 a. d. —Maecenas, 70 (H)-8 b. c. —Virgil, 70-19 b. c. —His life—The 
Eclogues—The Georgies—The iEneid. 

With the battle of Actium the Roman Republic came 
to an end. Julius Caesar had, to he sure, gathered all the 
Effect of the power of the state into his own hand, hut he 
Empire upon had held it only a short time; Octavius— 
literature. after 27 B. c., Augustus — held the full power 
until his death, and left it unimpaired to his successors. 
The change from a free government, whatever its corrup¬ 
tion and decay, to what was really an unlimited monarchy 
could not fail to have some influence upon literature. 
Henceforth the great orator might hope to win cases in 
the courts, hut he could no longer change the policy of 
the nation ; the historian might search the records of the 
past and describe the deeds of those who were no longer 
living, but if he wrote of the history of his own times, he 
must have the fear of the master always before his eyes; 
the poet could sing of love and wine and nature without 
let or hindrance, but poems of national and political im¬ 
portance could hardly be written except by those in sym¬ 
pathy with the empire. The emperor might exert his 

97 



98 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


influence to put down all literary expression not agreeable 
to him without encouraging literature of any kind, or he 
might encourage certain kinds of literature and certain 
writers without treating with severity even those whose 
works displeased him, or he might at the same time encour¬ 
age some and suppress others. Under an imperial master 
literary expression could not be so free as in the days of 
the republic, but the degree of restraint at any time de¬ 
pended upon the character of the emperor. It is due to 
the enlightened liberality of Augustus that the period of 
his rule was the most brilliant epoch of Roman literature. 

Augustus (63 b. C.-14 a. d.) had received a careful edu¬ 
cation in his youth, and had a genuine and intelligent 
admiration for literature. His own literary 
Augustus. productions comprised an epic poem entitled 
Sicily, some short epigrams, an unfinished tragedy entitled 
Ajax , orations, memoirs, and letters. Before his death he 
directed that an account of his deeds {Index Rerum Ges- 
tar um) should be engraved on bronze tablets and affixed to 
his tomb. He probably composed this account himself, and 
the copy of it found inscribed upon the wall of the temple 
of Augustus and Rome at Ancyra (the Monumentum An - 
cyranum), containing in simple and dignified language the 
record of his life, his political measures, and his military 
activity, shows the good taste of the first Roman emperor, 
for he who had become the ruler of the civilized world 
was not led to praise himself or speak in extravagant 
terms of any of his deeds, but composed the record of his 
wonderful life in terms of simplicity so grave and digni¬ 
fied as to inspire veneration. It was not, however, through 
his own compositions but through his influence that 
Augustus made his name great in the history of literature. 
He encouraged Yirgil, Horace, and other poets, he attended 
the recitations of authors who wished to bring their new 
works before an enlightened public, and he surrounded 
himself with friends who delighted in aiding and honor- 


PATRONS OF LITERATURE 


99 


Agrippa. 


Pollio. 


ing those whose genius could give glory to their patrons 
and add lustre to the empire. 

Among these friends of literature was Marcus Vipsa- 
nius Agrippa (63-12 b. c.), who caused the first map of 
the world to be set up in the porticus Poise 
and was himself the author of geographical 
works. More important was Gaius Asinius Pollio (67 B. c.- 
5 A. D.), who established the first public library in Rome. 

His example was followed by Augustus, who 
established two libraries, one in the porch of 
Octavia, the other in the temple of the Palatine Apollo, 
under the care of the learned Varro. Pollio was a soldier, 
statesman, and orator, but also wrote tragedies and a history 
of the years 60-42 b. c., in which he criticized boldly the 
statements of Julius Caesar, the adoptive father of Augus¬ 
tus. Pollio was the first to hold and encourage public 
and private recitations of new literary works. Less closely 
connected with the emperor was Marcus Valerius Messalla 
(64 B. C.-8 A. D.), who had originally been a 
partizan of Brutus, but had made his peace 
with Augustus. He was, like Pollio, an orator, but occu¬ 
pied himself also with antiquarian and grammatical re¬ 
searches, and in his earlier years made translations from 
the Greek and wrote Greek prose and verse. His house 
was a gathering place for the younger poets of the period. 

But of all the patrons of literature under Augustus, 
the most distinguished was Gaius Maecenas, the friend of 
Augustus, of Virgil, and of Horace. He was 
Maecenas. ]} 0rn about 70 B. c., and died in 8 b. c. A mem¬ 
ber of an ancient and noble Etruscan family, he had been 
carefully educated, and developed the most refined liter¬ 
ary taste. His attractive and winning personality made 
him of great service to Octavius in his negotiations with 
Antony and Sextus Pompey, and after the power of Au¬ 
gustus was established Maecenas was the close friend and 
constant adviser of the emperor. In spite of his fine liter- 


Messalla. 


100 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


ary taste, he was without talent as a writer, and his works, 
both prose and verse, were severely criticized by his con¬ 
temporaries and by later readers. It is little to be regretted 
that his writings, like those of the other patrons of litera¬ 
ture who have been mentioned, are lost. And yet the 
name of Maecenas will always occupy an honored place in 
the history of literature, for it was he who made possible 
the poems of Yirgil and Horace. 

The greatest of Roman poets is Virgil. Publius Ver- 
gilius Maro was born of humble parents, at Andes, a 
Virgil village in the territory of Mantua, October 

15, 70 b. c. His parents can not have been 
poor, for they gave him a good education, first at Cremona, 
then at Milan, and later at Rome. He was trained chiefly 
in rhetoric and philosophy, but the only teacher whose in¬ 
fluence seems to have been lasting was the Epicurean 
philosopher Siro. For oratory Virgil developed no taste. 
After the battle of Philippi (42 b. c.) the triumvirs recom¬ 
pensed their veterans by a distribution of farm lands, 
and VirgiPs farm was given to a new owner. At that 
time Asinius Pollio, who had admired VirgiPs poetry and 
had encouraged him to write the Bucolics or Eclogues , 
was governor of the region beyond the Po, and through 
his influence the poet was reinstated in his property. But 
in the following summer a new distribution of lands was 
made, and Pollio was no longer governor of the province. 
Virgil was dispossessed, and had to take refuge at the villa 
of his teacher Siro. Through the influence of Cornelius 
Gallus and Maecenas, Augustus was led to recompense the 
poet for his loss, and from this time Virgil was in close rela¬ 
tions to the imperial circle. Hereafter he lived at Rome and 
on an estate near Naples, which he received from Augustus. 

In 37 or 36 b. c. and the following years he wrote the 
Georgies in honor of Maecenas, and the JSneid, written at 
the request of Augustus, was begun in 29 b. c. When the 
poem was finished and the poet had reached his fifty- 


VIRGIL 


101 


first year, he went to Athens, intending to devote three 
years to the final revision of his work, and then to give him¬ 
self up to the study of philosophy. But at Athens he met 
with Augustus, who was on the point of returning to Rome 
from the East and invited him to join the imperial party. 
Yirgil was already ill from exposure to the heat during a 
visit to Megara, but accepted the invitation. On the voy¬ 
age his illness increased, and a few days after his arrival at 
Brundusium he died, September 21, 19 b. c. He was buried 
at Naples, where he had passed most of his later years. 

Virgil’s undisputed works are three: the Eclogues , 
called, on account of their pastoral nature, the Bucolics ; 
the Georgies ; and the JEneid. The Eclogues are a series 
of ten idylls in imitation of the poems of the Greek poet 
Theocritus. The Greek word “ idyll ” means “ little pic¬ 
ture,” and since all Virgil’s idylls, except the fourth, and 
most of those of Theocritus, depict the life of herdsmen 
in the country, the word is generally applied to pastoral 
poems. Virgil’s Eclogues are little pictures of pastoral 
life, but contain many allusions to the poet’s 
own circumstances and to his friends. and 
patrons, Pollio, Gallus, Varus, Maecenas, and 
Augustus. Pastoral poems, written for the 
cultivated circle of an imperial court, are 
necessarily artificial, and to this rule the Eclogues are no 
exception. Yet the charm of their diction, the polish of 
their verse, the genuine love of nature and appreciation of 
rural life which they display, have given these poems a 
well-deserved place among the most famous productions 
of Roman literature. In the Eclogues Virgil is, even more 
than in his other poems, dependent on Greek originals. 
Not only scattered lines, but whole passages are almost 
literal translations from the idylls of Theocritus, and less 
noticeable adaptations from other poets also occur. Some¬ 
times Virgil’s version is less beautiful than the original 
poem from which he borrows, and some of the most 


Virgil’s 

Works. 

The 

Eclogues. 


102 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


admired passages are not his own inventions; but even in 
the Eclogues , the earliest of his authentic works, written 
when he was about thirty years of age, amid the distress 
that accompanied his ejection from his little property, 
Virgil succeeds in making from his Greek originals new 
and great poems of genuinely Roman character. From 
first to last Virgil is a national poet. 

The poem which stands first in the series, but which 
was not the first in order of composition, has the form of 
a dialogue between two herdsmen, Meliboeus and Tityrus. 
In it the poet expresses his gratitude to Augustus, whom 
he calls a god. The poem begins: 

Meliboeus. Stretched in the shadow of the broad beech, thou 
Rehearsest, Tityrus, on the slender pipe 
Thy woodland music. We our fatherland 
Are leaving, we must shun the fields we love : 

While, Tityrus, thou, at ease amid the shade, 

Bidd’st answering woods call Amaryllis “fair.” 

Tityrus. O Meliboeus ! ’tis a god that made 
For me this holiday: for a god I’ll aye 
Account him; many a young lamb from my fold 
Shall stain his altar. Thanks to him, my kine 
Range as thou seest them: thanks to him, I play 
What songs I list upon my shepherd’s pipe. 1 * 

In the dialogue that follows, Tityrus, who represents 
Virgil himself, speaks of his visit to Rome and his meet¬ 
ing with Augustus: 

There, Meliboeus, I beheld that youth 

For whom each year twelve days my altars smoke. 

Thus answered he my yet unanswered prayer, 

“ Feed still, my lads, your kine, and yoke your bulls.” 3 

The fourth Eclogue , addressed to Pollio, and written in 
the year of his consulship (40 B. c.), celebrates in pro- 


1 Eel. i, 1-10. The selections from the Eclogues are given in the 

translation by C. S. Calverley. 2 Ibid., 42-45. 



VIRGIL 


103 


phetic and lofty language the birth of a child. As the 
child grows the world is to become better, until the golden 
age of peace and good-will among men shall come again. 
This poem was, curiously enough, long supposed to be an 
inspired prophecy of the coming of Christ. Who the child 
really was is uncertain, but there is some evidence that 
Gaius Asinius Gallus, Pollio’s son, is meant. The lofty 
tone is struck with the very opening of the poem: 

Muses of Sicily, a loftier song 

Wake we! Some tire of shrubs and myrtles low. 

Are woods our theme ? Then princely be the woods. 

Come are those last days that the Sibyl sang; 

The ages’ mighty march begins anew. 

Now comes the virgin, Saturn reigns again; 

Now from high heaven descends a wondrous race. 

Thou on the new-born babe—who first shall end 

That age of iron, bid a golden dawn 

Upon the broad world—chaste Lucina, smile: 

Now thy Apollo reigns. And Pollio, thou 
Shalt be our Prince, when he that grander age 
Opens, and onward roll the mighty moons: 

Thou, trampling out what prints our crimes have left, 

Shalt free the nations from perpetual fear. 

While he to bliss shall waken; with the Blest 
See the Brave mingling, and be seen of them, 

Ruling that world o’er which his father’s arm shed peace. 1 

But the atmosphere of the Eclogues is generally that 
of the country, and the form that of dialogue, with com¬ 
petitive songs by the herdsmen. The opening lines of the 
fifth Eclogue may serve as an example. The characters 
are Menalcas and Mopsus: 

Men. Mopsus, suppose now two good men have met— 
You at flute-blowing, as at verses I— 

We sit down here, where elm and hazel mix. 


8 


Eel. iv, 1-17. 



104 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


Mop. Menalcas, meet it is that I obey 
Mine elder. Lead, or into shade—that shifts 
At the wind’s fancy—or (mayhap the best) 

Into some cave. See, here’s a cave, o’er which 
A wild vine flings her flimsy foliage. 

Men. On these hills one—Amyntas—vies with you. 

Mop. Suppose he thought to out-sing Phoebus’ self ? 

Men. Mopsus, begin. If aught you know of flames 
That Phyllis kindles, aught of Alcon’s worth, 

Or Codrus’ ill-temper, then begin; 

Tityrus meanwhile will watch the grazing kids. 

Mop. Ay, I will sing the song which t’other day 
On a green beech’s bark I cut ; and scored 
The music as I wrote. Hear that, and bid 
Amyntas vie with me. 

Men. As willow lithe 

Yields to pale olive; as to crimson beds 
Of roses yields the lowly lavender, 

So, to my mind, Amyntas yields to you. 1 

The Eclogues were published not later than 38 B. c. 
In 29 B. c. the four books of the Georgies were completed. 

One of the most important tasks of the new 
The Georgies. g 0vernmen ^ now that the civil strife was 

ended, was to ensure the continuance of tranquility by 
settling the veterans in the country and encouraging agri¬ 
culture, which had been sadly neglected in Italy for many 
years. It was therefore with a practical end in view that 
Maecenas suggested to Virgil the composition of a poem 
on agriculture. This was a subject which Virgil was espe¬ 
cially qualified to treat with success, and the poem, to 
which he devoted seven years, is the most perfect of his 
works. It is a very free imitation of the Works and Days 
of Hesiod, and contains many passages derived from Ara- 
tus and other .Greek poets, but in its composition and its 
poetic beauty it is independent of all but Virgil’s own 
genius. It is dedicated to Maecenas. The first book treats 


Eel. v, 1-18. 



VIRGIL 


105 


of the tilling of the soil, the beginning of agriculture, the 
instruments needed by the farmer, the tasks appropriate 
to the different seasons, and the signs of the weather, end¬ 
ing with a splendid passage describing the portents at the 
time of Caesar’s death, and a prayer that Augustus may 
put an end to the wars and disorders of the times. This 
passage is closely connected with the preceding lines in 
which the signs of the weather given by the appearance of 
the sun are described. It begins : 

And last, what evening brings, and when the wind 
Bears placid clouds, and also with what thoughts 
The wet south wind is moved, of all these things 
The sun will give thee signs. Who dares to say 
The sun is false ? He even warns ofttimes 
That strife unseen and treason are at hand 
And hidden wars are swelling to break forth. 

He even, pitying Rome for Caesar’s fall, 

In pitchy darkness veiled his shining head; 

The impious age feared endless night. Yet then 
Earth also and the waters of the sea 
And obscene dogs and evil-omened birds 
Gave signs. How often did we see boil forth 
From bursting furnace of the Cyclopes 
The waves of iEtna o’er the fertile fields 
And roll her balls of flame and molten rocks! 

Germania heard through all the sky the sound 
Of arms; the Alps with unused tremblings shook. 

Then, too, by many through the silent groves 
A mighty voice was heard, and pallid forms 
In wondrous wise appeared in dusky night, 

And dumb beasts spake (oh, horror!), and the streams 
Stood still, and earth yawned open, and the sad 
Carved ivory wept within the sacred fanes, 

And sweat poured forth from statues wrought of bronze. 
Eridanus, the king of rivers, rushed 
Whirling the woods along on eddies mad, 

And through the fields bore stables with the herds. 1 


1 Georgies , i, 461-483. 




106 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


The second book treats of the culture of trees and of 
the vine, and includes a description of the properties of 
different kinds of soil. Among its beautiful passages one 
is the praise of Italy , 1 another the description of the bless¬ 
ings of the farmer’s life, beginning— 

O blessed farmers, if they only might 

Their blessings know! For whom the bounteous earth 

Herself, afar from strife of clashing arms, 

Pours forth an easy livelihood. 2 

The third book is devoted to the care of horses and 
cattle. A beautiful passage, near the beginning of the 
book, expresses the poet’s love for his native Mantua and 
his homage to Augustus. The first lines of this passage 
are as follows: 

I first, if life be granted, coming back, 

Will lead the Muses from Aonian heights 
To my own land; I first will bring to thee, 

My Mantua, Idumsean palms, and in 
Thy verdant mead will build a marble fane 
Beside the water, where the mighty stream 
Of Mincius wanders slow with winding curves 
And clothes with tender reeds the river banks. 

There in the midst for me shall Csesar stand 
And hold the temple. Then to him will I 
As victor, clad in Tyrian purple garb, 

Drive to the stream a hundred four-horse cars. 3 

The fourth book treats of the culture of bees. It con¬ 
tains several passages of singular beauty, one of the most 
striking of which is the description of the life of the hive . 4 
The poem ends with an epic description of the visit of 
Aristaeus, the mythical founder of bee culture, to his 
mother, the sea-nymph Cyrene. This includes an account 
of the struggle of Aristaeus with the sea-god Proteus and 


1 Georgies, ii, 136 ff. 
8 Ibid., iii, 9-18. 


2 Ibid., ii, 458-460. 
4 Ibid., iv, 149 fit. 



VIRGIL 


107 


the death of Eurydice, the wife of Orpheus. A tradition ex¬ 
ists that the poem originally ended with a passage in praise 
of Gallus; but before its publication Gallus had died in 
disgrace, and the present ending was substituted. In its 
final form the close of the Georgies shows that Virgil was 
already tending to become an epic poet. 

At the request of Augustus, Virgil began, in 29 b. c., 
the composition of his greatest work, the jEneid, in which 
he tells of the mythical origin of the Roman race and of 
the greatness and glory of the Rome that was to arise and 
reach its height under the leadership of the J ulian family, 
which claimed direct descent from ^Eneas. As early as 
„ ., the sixth century B. c. the Sicilian poet Stesi- 
chorus had sung oi the coming ot Hineas to 
Italy. Naevius and Ennius had connected iEneas with the 
origin of Rome, and had fixed some of the details of the 
story. Upon the foundations thus prepared for him Vir¬ 
gil erected the splendid structure of his poem. In the 
Eclogues he had followed, closely for the most part, in the 
footsteps of Theocritus; the Works and Days of Hesiod 
had served as the prototype of the Georgies , though here 
Virgil was so far from slavish imitation that his work 
surpasses the Works and Days in every respect. In the 
2Eneid the imitation of Homer’s iliad and Odyssey is con¬ 
stantly evident, and certain passages are clearly derived 
from Euripides, Sophocles, and Apollonius of Rhodes ; but 
the ^Eneid is by no means a mere imitation. In some 
respects it is far inferior to the Homeric poems. It lacks 
their simplicity, their rapidity of movement, and their 
fresh joyousness ; it can not be compared with them in nar¬ 
rative power or brilliancy of imagery. In these qualities 
Homer is unapproachable. But as a national epic, as the 
expression in prophetic form of the national greatness and 
of the poet’s deep-seated passion for his country’s glory 
the uEneid had no prototype, as it has had no successor. 
Virgil is not Homer; he is reflective, filled with the deep 


108 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


thoughts that centuries of speculation had implanted in 
the serious minds of his age; and his great poem is more 
than a mere narrative. In execution the jUneid is un¬ 
even. At times it is polished to the highest degree, at 
other times it falls to a level hardly, if at all, above 
mediocrity; some passages breathe a poetic fervor unsur¬ 
passed, while others might almost as well be written in 
prose. So conscious was Virgil himself of the uneven¬ 
ness and imperfections of his work that he wished it to be 
burned after his death, and could hardly be persuaded to 
leave its fate in the hands of his friends. His death came 
before he had perfected the poem, and its most perfect 
parts show what he wished it all to be and what it might 
have become had his life been spared. Even though it lacks 
the master’s final revision, it remains the greatest poem of 
Roman times and one of the greatest poems of all ages. 

The JSneid was to be for the Romans what the Iliad 
and the Odyssey together were for the Greeks. The first 
six books are modelled chiefly on the Odyssey. As the 
Odyssey tells of the wanderings and adven¬ 
tures of Odysseus before he reaches his home, 
so these books of the lEneid tell of the ad¬ 
ventures of iEneas on his voyage from Troy to Italy, and 
more than one passage shows how constantly the Odyssey 
was in the poet’s mind. The last six books tell of the strug¬ 
gles of iEneas and his followers against the warriors who 
opposed their settlement in Italy; and here the combats 
described in the Iliad are imitated, sometimes even in de¬ 
tails. In the final struggle iEneas is a second Achilles, and 
the brave but unfortunate Turnus is an Italian Hector. 

In the first book, after a brief introduction, the poem 
begins in the midst of the story. The fleet of iEneas is 
off the coast of Sicily, when Juno causes the wind-god, 
^Eolus, to rouse a storm. The Trojan vessels are driven 
on the rocks, and the sea is stirred to its lowest depths. 
Then Neptune, angered that his waters are thus tossed 


Imitation of 
Homer. 


VIRGIL 


109 


about without his consent, rebukes ^Eolus, and puts the 
waves to rest: 

He said, and ere his words were done, 

Allays the surge, brings back the sun: 

Triton and swift Cymothoe drag 
The ships from off the pointed crag: 

He, trident-armed, each dull weight heaves, 

Through the vast shoals a passage cleaves, 

Makes smooth the ruffled wave, and rides 
Calm o’er the surface of the tides. 

As when sedition oft has stirred 
In some great town the vulgar herd, 

And brands and stones already fly— 

For rage has weapons always nigh— 

Then should some man of worth appear 
Whose stainless virtue all revere, 

They hush, they hist: his clear voice rules 
Their rebel wills, their anger cools: 

So ocean ceased at once to rave, 

When, calmly looking o’er the wave, 

Girt with a range of azure sky, 

The father bids his chariot fly. 1 

The Trojans reach the African coast, where iEneas 
meets his mother, Venus, and is directed to the city of 
Carthage, which the Phoenician princess Dido has just 
founded. ./Eneas and his comrade, the faithful Achates, 
enter the city wrapped in a cloud, which makes them 
invisible. When they are revealed to Dido, she receives 
them kindly, and takes them to her palace. .Eneas sends 
to the ships for his son Ascanius, also called lulus, but 
Venus substitutes for him the god of love, Cupid, who 
fills Dido’s heart with love for ./Eneas. In the second 
book .Eneas begins the story of his adventures with a 
superb account of the fall of Troy, his own valiant but 
ineffectual struggle against the Greeks, and his final 

1 JEneid, i, 142-156. The selections from the JEneid are given in 
Conington’s translation. 



110 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


flight. In the third book he continues his story to the 
time of his arrival at Carthage. The fourth book is 
devoted to the love and fate of Dido. iEneas and Dido, 
with their followers, go hunting in the forest; a storm 
arises, and the two, separated from the rest, take refuge 
in a cave, wdiere only the woodland nymphs witness the 
union of their loves. Dido looks forward to a joint reign 
over Trojans and Tyrians alike. But iEneas is warned 
by Mercury, at the command of Jupiter, to fulfil his des¬ 
tiny and sail to Italy. Dido overwhelms him with loving 
reproaches, but in vain; he remains steadfast in his obedi¬ 
ence to the divine will. Then Dido determines to die. 
She erects a funeral pyre, places upon it the mementoes of 
her former husband, Sychseus, and mounts it to end her 
life. But before she dies she calls down curses upon 
iEneas and his race : 

Eye of the world, majestic Sun, 

Who seest whate’er on earth is done, 

Thou, Juno, too, interpreter 
And witness of the heart’s fond stir, 

And Hecate, tremendous power, 

In cross-ways howled at midnight hour, 

Avenging fiends, and gods of death 
Who breathe in dying Dido’s breath, 

Stoop your great powers to ills that plead 
To heaven, and my petition heed. 

If needs must be that wretch abhorred 
Attain the port and float to land; 

If such the fate of heaven’s high lord, 

And so the moveless pillars stand; 

Scourged by a savage enemy, 

An exile from his son’s embrace, 

So let him sue for aid and see 
His people slain before his face; 

Nor, when to humbling peace at length 
He stoops, be his or life or land, 

But let him fall in manhood’s strength 
And welter tombless on the sand. 


VIRGIL 


111 


Such malison to heaven I pour, 

A last libation with my gore. 

And, Tyrians, you through time to come 
His seed with deathless hatred chase: 

Be that your gift to Dido’s tomb. 

No love, no league ’twixt race and race. 

Rise from my ashes, scourge of crime, 

Born to pursue the Dardan horde 
To-day, to-morrow, through all time, 

Oft as our hands can wield the sword, 

Fight shore with shore, fight sea with sea, 

Fight all that are or e’er shall be! 1 

These lines are the poetic and mythological justifica¬ 
tion for the long and disastrous wars between Rome and 
Carthage. In the fifth book the Trojans reach Sicily, 
and celebrate at Eryx funeral games in honor of Anchises, 
the father of iEneas, who had died there the year before. 
In the sixth book they reach Cumae, in Italy. H£neas 
descends to Hades to consult with the shade of Anchises. 
Here he sees the fabled monsters of the lower regions, 
and the shades of many departed heroes. Then there 
pass before him the forms of those as yet unborn. This 
gives the poet an opportunity to praise the great men of 
Rome, among them Julius Caesar and Augustus. Here 
he sees the form of the young Marcellus, son of Octavia, 
the sister of Augustus. When this hook was written, 
Marcellus had recently died in his twentieth year. Virgil 
read his lines 2 on Marcellus to Augustus and Octavia, and 
the bereaved mother was so moved that she fainted. Vir¬ 
gil’s description of the realm of the dead is in some parts 
unusually beautiful, and is especially interesting, because 
it stands, not only in date but also in many other respects, 
midway between the eleventh book of Homer’s Odyssey 
and Dante’s Divine Comedy. 

The last six books of the JEneid, recounting the 


1 JEneid , iv, 607-629. 


2 Ibid., vi, 868-886. 



12 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


struggles of the Trojans in Italy, contain many fine 
passages, but are for the most part less interesting to the 
modern reader than the earlier books. In 
books aStS1X 111 an y P ar ts they are finished with most ex¬ 

quisite art, even showing that Virgil’s tech¬ 
nical ability increased as the poem drew toward its close, 
but many other passages show the lack of the final revi¬ 
sion. To the Roman the ancient legends of the origin of 
the Roman power must have been of surpassing interest, 
but most modern readers remember, amid the successive 
scenes of strife, only the heroic Turnus, the lovely Lavinia, 
che warlike maidens Camilla and Juturna, and the brave 
and devoted friends, Nisus and Euryalus, who were slain 
when endeavoring to carry a message in the night through 
the hostile camp to the absent ^Eneas: 


Blest pair! if aught my verse avail, 
No day shall make your memory fail 
From off the heart of time, 

While Capitol abides in place, 

The mansion of the JEneian race, 
And throned upon that moveless base 
Rome’s father sits sublime. 1 


The JEneid closes with the death of Turnus, the chief 
opponent of the Trojans in Italy. In spite of its obvious 

Vir n in the ^ m P er ^ ec ^ ons ’ ^ greatest poem in the 

mule Ages. La tin language; and no later epic poem in 
any language equalled or even approached it 
in excellence until the appearance of Dante’s Divine 
Comedy. It is not to be wondered at that throughout 
the Middle Ages Virgil was regarded as the impersona¬ 
tion of all that was great in poetry; nor is it strange that 
the poet whose verses breathe such an indescribable, sweet 
sadness, who sings in lofty, inspired language of that 
Roman greatness which was ever present to the medi- 


1 JEneid, ix, 446-449. 























lUUniti^nUimmmuiJinniiuiauilliHnu 

•' V■ -•.' - 



m m M rTT n ii i nrnr r rrT m irrirn n m mum r r mr n n inmmm 


ftiW *\lsJ 
[wy/'ACj'* 


aiu.jyu.A 

■ 




- af 

WMMk 


IrST- Jfl 
•iPv 


VIRGIL AND TWO MUSES. 
Mosaic in the Bardo Museum, Tunis. 































VIRGIL 


113 


aeval imagination, who describes the dwellings of the 
dead, and who was even believed to have foretold the 
coming of the Messiah, should have become in mediaeval 
legends the possessor of all wisdom and all magic power. 
It is natural that Dante chose Virgil as his guide through 
hell and purgatory, and would gladly have admitted him 
to paradise had his theology allowed him to do so. 


CHAPTER IX 


HORACE 


Quintus Horatius Flaccus, 65-8 b. c. —Virgil and Horace^-Life of 
Horace—The first book of Satires—The Epodes—The second book of 
Satires—The first three books of Odes—The first book of Epistles— 
The literary Epistles—The Carmen Sseculare—The fourth book of 
Odes—Conclusion. 


Virgil and 
Horace. 


Throughout the Middle Ages Virgil was regarded as 
incomparably the greatest of Roman poets. In modern 
times his greatness has been called in question, and some 
scholars have even gone so far as to deny that he was a great 
poet at all. The difference is due, in great measure, to 
the fact that in the Middle Ages the poems of Homer, 
Theocritus, and the other Greek poets whom 
Virgil imitated, were unknown, and Virgil was 
regarded as the great epic and pastoral poet 
of antiquity. That Virgil imitated the Greek poets is 
evident, but in the last chapter enough has been said to 
show that his poetry contains qualities not to he found in 
the works of the Greeks, and that although his poems are 
in many respects not equal to those of Homer, he must 
still he regarded as one of the greatest poets of the world. 
The increase of knowledge which has led to the undue de¬ 
preciation of. Virgil tended to make the second great poet 
of the Augustan period more highly appreciated. The odes 
of Horace, which are the best known and the most popular 
of his poems, are imitations of the poetry of the Greek 
lyrists, Alcaeus, Sappho, Anacreon, and their followers, 
114 


HORACE 


115 


but the Greek originals are for the most part lost, so that 
Horace can not suffer by comparison with them. More¬ 
over, modern taste is less pleased with epic than with lyric 
verse, and the delicate, highly finished, and charming odes 
of Horace appeal strongly to the cultivated modern reader. 
In his satires and epistles, too, Horace, whatever his in¬ 
debtedness to Lucilius and others, displays undoubted 
originality. It is, therefore, natural that he is sometimes 
called the greatest of Roman poets. But Virgil wrote of 
greater themes; he was the great national poet, w T ho sang 
in grand, prophetic tones of the greatness of Rome and 
her destinies, while Horace appealed to a narrower circle 
of cultured readers. Yet Horace is, in his own field, 
unsurpassed, and deserves all the admiration that has 
been accorded him. 

Quintus Horatius Flaccus was born at Venusia, in 
Apulia, near the border of Lucania, December 8, 65 b. c. 
His father was a freedman, the owner of a small farm, but 
he determined to give his son the best education possible. 
The school at Venusia was unsatisfactory, and Horace’s 
father moved with his family to Rome, where he gained 
his livelihood as a coactor or collector of the money offered 
by bidders at auctions. This was a business 
Horace soine i m P or t ance at Rome, and must have 

been lucrative, for Horace attended the best 
schools, where he came in contact with the sons of wealthy 
and noble parents. His father exercised personal super¬ 
vision over the boy’s education, accompanying him to the 
school, and calling his attention to what went on about 
him, pointing out the evil effects of bad conduct, and 
giving him practical advice. In school, under a strict 
master, Orbilius, who did not spare the rod, Horace read 
the translation of the Odyssey by Livius Andronicus, and 
also the Iliad, the latter, perhaps, in the original Greek. 
From Rome he went to Athens to study philosophy, and 
was there when Brutus arrived in 44 B. c., after the death 


116 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


of Caesar. Like many another patriotic young Koman, he 
joined the army of Brutus, in which he was given the rank 
of tribunus militum. He took part in the battle of 
Philippi and the flight that followed it. In the distribu¬ 
tion of lands among the soldiers of the victorious armies, 
Horace’s farm was confiscated, and the young man, whose 
father had died during his absence, returned to Borne, 
where he obtained, perhaps with the last remnants of his 
father’s savings, a small position as a clerk of the 
quaestors. 

This position gave him a livelihood and some leisure 
for poetry. Poverty, he says, 1 drove him to write verses, 
and certainly his poems brought him prosperity, for they 
led Virgil and Varius to introduce him to Maecenas in the 
spring of 38 b. c., and in the following winter Maecenas 
admitted him to the circle of his familiar friends. Horace, 
with his short, rotund figure, his witty, genial conversation, 
and his poetic genius, became socially very intimate with 
Maecenas, without, however, being his confidant in political 
matters. When Maecenas went to Brundusium to nego¬ 
tiate an agreement between Augustus and Antony, Horace, 
with Virgil, Varius, Plotius, and the Greek rhetorician 
Heliodorus, was in his train. 2 In 34 or 33 B. c. Maecenas 
gave him a country seat in the Sabine hills not far from 
Tibur (Tivoli), so large that it contained five farmhouses. 
Here the poet spent a great part of his remaining years. 
Maecenas also introduced him to Augustus, who wished to 
make him his private secretary, but Horace refused the 
honor, probably because he preferred to retain his free¬ 
dom. The emperor was not offended by the refusal, but 
continued to regard him as a friend. Honored by Augustus 
and his circle, Horace lived in comfort and peace. He died 
November 27, 8 B. c., and was buried near the tomb of 
Maecenas, on the Esquiline. He made Augustus his heir. 


1 Epist. II, ii, 51. 


* Sat. L t. 



HORACE 


117 


Upon his return to Rome after the battle of Philippi, 
Horace employed his leisure in writing verse. To this 
period belong the Erodes and the first book of the Satires. 
These poems were originally not intended for publication, 
but were read to the author's friends. About 35 B. c. 
ten Satires were collected and published. Horace him¬ 
self calls these poems not Satires , but Sermones or 
“Talks.” He even disclaims the title of poet, though 
his “ Talks ” are in hexameters. The first Satire is ad¬ 
dressed to Maecenas, and serves to dedicate the entire 
collection to the poet's chief patron, though its subject 
The first is the general discontent of every man with 
book of his own lot and the foolishness of heaping 

Satires. U p wea ]th. In general, the Satires are not, 

as were those of Lucilius, attacks upon individuals, 
but rather criticisms of the follies and foibles of the 
times. In the second Satire the dangers to which adul¬ 
terers expose themselves are set forth; in the third, 
those who carp at and criticize their neighbors are held 
up to ridicule; the fourth praises the wit, but criti¬ 
cizes sharply the style of Lucilius, the defects of which 
are attributed to the rapidity with which Lucilius wrote 
great quantities of verse. In the same Satire Horace de¬ 
fends himself against the charge of malice, maintaining 
that his verse is far less malicious than private gossip, 
and describes the way his father took to train him in 
his youth: 

But if I still seem personal and bold, 

Perhaps you’ll pardon when my story’s told. 

When my good father taught me to be good. 

Scarecrows he took of living flesh and blood. 

Thus, if he warned me not to spend, but spare 
The moderate means I owe to his wise care, 

’Twas, “ See the life that son of Albius leads! 

Observe that Barrus, vilest of ill weeds! 

Plain beacons these for heedless youth, whose taste 
Might lead them else a fair estate to waste ”: 


118 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


If lawless love were what he bade me shun, 

“Avoid Scatanius’ slough,” his words would run: 

“ Wise men,” he’d add, “the reason will explain 
Why you should follow this, from that refrain: 

For me, if I can train you in the ways 
Trod by the worthy folks of earlier days, 

And, while you need direction, keep your name 
And life unspotted, I’ve attained my aim : 

When riper years have seasoned brain and limb, 

You’ll drop your corks, and like a Triton swim.” 1 

The fifth Satire is an account of the journey to Brun- 
dusium in the train of Maecenas with Virgil, Varius, and 
others; the sixth, again addressed to Maecenas, tells us 
how the poet became acquainted with the great man, re¬ 
verts to his father’s attentive care, and declares that 
Horace has no reason to be ashamed of his origin or dis¬ 
contented with his lot. The seventh tells of a joke in a 
lawsuit between Publius Rupilius Rex and a banker, Per- 
sius; the eighth, of some interrupted magic rites before a 
statue of the god Priapus; and the ninth, of the poet’s in¬ 
effectual efforts to get rid of a bore, who stuck to him until 
he was dragged off to the court by a plaintiff. In the 
tenth Satire , which serves as an epilogue to the collection, 
Horace returns to his criticism of Lucilius, maintaining 
that what he had said in the fourth Satire was really not 
too severe, and at the same time he expresses his opinion 
of some of the other Roman poets and of his own ability: 

No hand can match Fundanus at a piece 
Where slave and mistress clip an old man’s fleece; 

Pollio in buskins chants the deeds of kings; 

Yarius outsoars us all on Homer’s wings; 

The Muse that loves the woodland and the farm 
To Yirgil lends her gayest, tenderest charm. 

For me, this walk of satire, vainly tried 
By Atacinus and some few beside, 


1 Sat. I,.iv, 103-120, freely translated by Conington. 



HORACE 


119 


Best suits my gait; yet readily I yield 
To him who first set footstep on that field, 

Nor meanly seek to rob him of the bay 
That shows so comely on his locks of gray. 1 2 

The Epodes were written in the same period as the 
first book of Satires , and, like them, are on various sub- 
The Epodes 3 ec ^ s * About 31 b. c. Horace yielded to the 
persuasions of Maecenas and published a col¬ 
lection of seventeen pieces which he had written at vari¬ 
ous times since 40 B. c. The first ten are in the epodic 
metre, that is, an iambic trimeter followed by an iambic 
dimeter, as in the lines: 

Beatus We, qui procul negotiis 
Ut pri8ca gens mortalium, 

Patema rum lobus exercet suis t 
Solutus omni fenore , a 

the following translation of which shows approximately 
the rhythm of the original: 

Oh blest is he, who far from troubles, fears and cares, 

As did the early mortal race, 

With oxen of his own through fields ancestral fares, 

And knows not usury’s disgrace. 

The shorter line is called an epode, or appendix, to the 
longer, and it is from this that the collection of poems 
gets its name. The last seven poems of the collection 
are in various metres, though most of these are in alter¬ 
nating long and short lines. Horace himself calls these 
poems Iambics simply. In them he imitates the Greek 
poet Archilochus, but though several of the poems are 
somewhat aggressive, they all lack the intense and violent 
tone of invective attributed by the ancients to Archi¬ 
lochus, of which, however, the extant fragments of 


1 Sat. I, x, 40-49. freely translated by Conlngton. 

2 Epode ii, 1-4. 

9 



120 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


Archilochus show few traces. In one of his Epistles 1 
Horace claims to be the first who introduced the iambics 
of Archilochus into Latin literature, but this is not 
strictly true, for Catullus and his contemporaries had 
written invectives in iambics. Horace did, however, intro¬ 
duce the epodic metre, and he is also the first to employ 
his iambics to castigate the follies of his time rather than 
individuals. In subject the Erodes range from the praise 
of rural life (ii) and encouragement to live a life of ease 
and pleasure (xiii) to invectives against a rich upstart 
(iv) or a woman who deals in poisons (v, xvii), and a 
rebuke of the Romans who are eager to stir up a civil 
war (xvi). The last Epode (xvii) has the form of a dia¬ 
logue between the poet and the poisoner Canidia, but the 
others are the simple expressions of the poet’s senti¬ 
ments, often in the form of a letter or address to a friend. 
In this they differ from the Satires , which have some¬ 
thing of the dialogue form, either between two persons 
mentioned by name or between the poet and some 
indefinite person, perhaps the reader. 

The second book of Satires, finished about 30 b. c., 
contains eight pieces, most of which are in the form of a 
The second dialogue between the poet and one other 
book of person. The most amusing is the fifth, a 
Satires. dialogue between Ulysses and Tiresias, in 
which Tiresias tells Ulysses how he can repair his for¬ 
tunes by paying court to rich men and getting them to 
mention him in their wills. This Satire is directed 
against a class of men only too numerous in Rome. 
Others treat of various subjects, such as the serious study 
bestowed upon dinners (viii, iv), certain Stoic doctrines 
(iii, vii), the criticisms of the earlier Satires (i), or the 
joys of the farmer’s simple life (ii). In almost every 
case, the thoughts and theories expressed are put into the 


1 Epist. I, xix, 553. 



HORACE 


121 


mouth of some one other than the poet, whereas in the first 
book of Satires the poet expressed the opinions himself. 
Horace’s Satires differ from those of Lucilius in being less 
bitter and less political, more carefully composed and writ¬ 
ten, and far more genial. The kindly, gentlemanly spirit 
of the man is everywhere visible. His “ talks ” are the 
witty, amusing conversation of a man of the world, often 
dealing with serious subjects, but always in a light and easy 
way. They are full of sententious remarks, which have 
been frequently quoted from Horace’s time to our own. 

Catullus and his contemporaries had imitated almost 
exclusively the poems of the Alexandrians, of the Greek 
The Odes poets, that is to say, who flourished after 
Greece had lost her independence. Horace 
in his Epocles went farther back and imitated Archilochus, 
and in his Odes , without altogether neglecting the Alex¬ 
andrians, he follows for the most part in the footsteps of 
Alcaeus, Sappho, and Anacreon. Among his odes are 
several which are in part translations of extant fragments 
of these poets, and it is certain that if the poems of the 
early Greek lyrists were not almost entirely lost, we could 
recognize many of them in Latin version in the Odes of 
Horace. The Odes contain also lines that remind one of 
similar passages in the poems of Euripides, Bacchylides, 
and other Greek poets, but in form as well as in contents 
they are for the most part imitations of the three great 
early lyrists. Most of the Odes are divided into stanzas 
of four lines each, and in all such a division is possible, 
with perhaps one exception. The first three books of 
the Odes were published in 23 b. c., but their composition 
belongs in part as early as 30 B. c. The first book con¬ 
tains thirty-eight poems, the second twenty, the third 
thirty. The first ode of Book I serves as a dedication to 
Maecenas, and in the odes immediately following nearly 
all the metres employed in the three books are used one 
after the other. Throughout the three books variety of 


122 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


metre governs the arrangement. The second book opens 
with an ode addressed to Pollio, and at the beginning of 
the third book are six odes celebrating in various tones 
the Roman glory. The last ode of Book III, beginning 

Exegi monumentum cere perennius , 

I’ve reared a monument than bronze more lasting, 

serves as an epilogue to the finished collection. 

The subjects of the odes are so various as to touch 
upon almost every circumstance of human life and every 
mood of human feeling. Friendship, love, the gods, 
patriotism, conviviality, the pleasures of country life, 
events of the day, and philosophical thoughts, all find 
their place. In tone the odes are grave and gay, lively 
and serene, sometimes fantastic, more often thoughtful 
or at least reasonable. More than once the thought that 
life is short and we should pluck its blossoms ere they 
fade occurs in one form or another. The workmanship 
of the odes is wonderful in its perfection. Horace is not 
one of those who believe that perfect poetry comes purely 
by inspiration, without labor. He writes no word without 
being sure that it is the best word in its place. His 
metres are adapted to the thought he wishes to express, 
and the perfection of the metre makes even simple or 
common thoughts beautiful. The odes are not the ardent 
outpourings of a passionate spirit, as are some of the 
poems of Catullus, but they are the carefully elaborated 
expressions of the thoughts and sentiments of a gentle, 
kindly, thoughtful, but gay and humorous man of the 
world. They do not stir our blood, but they arouse our 
admiration, satisfy our taste, and please us by their tone 
of cultured and refined sentiment. The variety of their 
contents can not be presented in selections, nor can all 
the qualities of any ode be adequately rendered in a trans¬ 
lation. One of the shortest but not the least attractive 
odes is the following, addressed to his cup-bearer: 


HORACE 


123 


Persia’s pomp, my boy, I hate; 

No coronals of flowerets rare 
For me on bark of linden plait, 

Nor seek thou to discover where 
The lush rose lingers late. 

With unpretending myrtle twine, 

Naught else! It fits your brows 
Attending me; it graces mine 
As I in happy ease carouse 
Beneath the thick-leaved vine. 1 

The following ode offers more variety, and is perhaps 
more representative: 

One dazzling mass of solid snow, 

Soracte stands; the bent woods fret 
Beneath their load, and, sharpest set 
With frost, the streams have ceased to flow. 

Pile on great fagots and break up 
The ice; let influence more benign 
Enter with four-years-treasured wine, 

Fetched in the ponderous Sabine cup; 

Leave to the gods all else. When they 
Have once bid rest the winds that war 
Over the passionate seas, no more 
Gray ash and cypress rock and sway. 

Ask not what future suns shall bring; 

Count to-day gain, whate’er it chance 
To be; nor, young man, scorn the dance, 

Nor deem sweet Love an idle thing, 

Ere Time thy April youth have changed 
To sourness. Park and public walk 
Attract thee now, and whispered talk 
At twilight meetings prearranged. 


1 Od. I, xxxviii, translated by Sir Theodore Martin. 



124 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


Hear now the pretty laugh that tells 
In what dim corner lurks thy love, 

And snatch a bracelet or a glove 
From wrist or hand that scarce rebels. 1 

After the three books of Odes were published in 23 b. c., 
Horace returned to his previous*manner of composition in 
hexameters, hut gave to the collection of twenty poems 
which he published in 20 B. c., the form of 
o^Episties 011 ^ e ^ ers or Epistles. These are sometimes real 
letters to his friends, sometimes satires or 
“talks” in the form of letters. The subjects of these 
poems are as various as those of the Satires , but it is 
evident that the poet is turning more toward philosophy. 
He advises his friends to take things as they find them, 
without allowing themselves to he troubled or excited 
(vi), he teaches the Stoic doctrine that virtue suffices to 
make men happy (xvi), he advocates calmness and the 
avoidance of care, and urges Tibullus (iv, 13) to live as if 
each day were to be his last. But he also sings the praise of 
wine (v, 16 ff.) and of the quiet life in the country (x, 
xiv). In two epistles he gives practical advice concern¬ 
ing intercourse with persons of high station, and various 
practical suggestions are found scattered through the 
other poems. In a letter to Maecenas (xix) he ridicules 
his imitators and mocks at his critics. The twentieth 
poem is an address to his book as he sends it into the 
world. In it he foretells the various fortunes of the book, 
and at the end he gives his age, saying that he has seen 
four times eleven Decembers in the year of the consulship 
of Lepidus and Lollius. In these letters Horace reveals 
his character more fully and with a more delicate touch 
than in any of his other works. The Odes are the works by 
which he will always be best known, and to which he owes 
his great fame as a poet, but nowhere so fully as in the 


1 Od. I, ix, Calverley’s version. 



HORACE 


125 


Epistles does he disclose his kindly and genial, yet serious 
views of life as they ripened with his advancing years. 

In the seventh Epistle of the first book Horace refuses, 
at least for the present, an invitation of Maecenas, on 
the ground that his health is poor and that he needs the 
repose of the country and the seashore. At the same 
time he explains the manner in which he wishes his 
relation to his patron to be understood. He is not a para¬ 
site, and openly says that he must retain his freedom, 
and can not be at the beck and call even of Maecenas. 
In the first Epistle (lines 4 and 10) he refuses to write 
more odes, because he is no longer young and is turn¬ 
ing toward philosophy. The same attitude is disclosed 
The seoond i n second Epistle of the second book 
book of (lines 25 and 141 ff.). The poet wished to 
Epistles. retire and pursue the study of philosophy; 
but he had gained much experience in literary matters, 
and in three letters, written probably between 19 and 
14 b. c., he records the results of this experience. The 
first letter is addressed to Augustus, the second to Julius 
Floras. These two form the second book of the Epistles. 
The third letter, addressed to the Pisos, father and two 
sons, was originally published with the others, but was 
soon separated from them, and is known as 
Poet^a t ^ ie ^ rs P° e ti ca - This is not a systematic 
treatise on poetry, but Horace’s views, derived 
in part from his own experience, in part from his reading, 
are set forth in the easy style of a letter or talk. He in¬ 
sists that each poem must have a consistent fundamental 
idea or plot, that the characters of a drama must speak as 
befits their age and station, and must be drawn from life, 
he advises care in the choice of a subject, points out that 
nobody cares for mediocre poets, and that what is once 
published can not be recalled. Throughout the letter or 
treatise he constantly impresses upon his readers his con¬ 
viction that good poetry is the result of hard work. Many 


126 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


critical and historical remarks are scattered through the 
Ars Poetica as well as through the two other letters. 

In spite of his desire to give up the writing of poetry 
and to devote himself to philosophy, Horace did not finish 
his career as a lyric poet with the completion of three 
books of odes. In 17 b. c. it was decided that the Sibyl¬ 
line hooks required the celebration of the ludi sceculares , 
which were supposed to recur at the end of every sceculum , 
or period of one hundred and ten years. An important 
part of the celebration was the singing of a hymn in honor 
of Apollo and Diana. This was to be sung by a chorus of 
boys and girls of pure Roman birth, both of whose parents 
were living, and whose mothers had married only once. 
Horace was asked by Augustus to compose this hymn, and 
could not refuse the honor, which distinguished him as 
the official poet laureate of the Roman Empire. The 
hymn, called the Carmen Sceculare , is a some- 
Sgecuiare what formal poem, as is fitting for the solemn 
occasion at which it was first sung, hut it 
shows real religious feeling, mingled with pride and con¬ 
fidence in the Roman greatness. It is the work of a mas¬ 
terly artist and an inspired poet. 

In addition to appointing him to write the Carmen 
Sceculare, Augustus demanded of Horace a song, or songs, 
in honor of his stepsons, Tiberius and Drusus. Horace 
could not refuse, and composed odes in honor of the vic¬ 
tories of Drusus (IV, iv) and Tiberius (IV, xiv), to which 
he added thirteen other poems, making a 
book^of Odes f° ur th hook of fifteen odes, written appar¬ 
ently in the years 17-13 B. c. The fourth 
hook of Odes is in no way inferior to its predecessors in 
variety of form or perfection of workmanship, and it 
contains a larger proportion of exalted, patriotic poems. 
The sixth ode, addressed to Apollo, seems to he a pro- 
cemium to the Carmen Sceculare , or at any rate to have 
some connection with the ludi sceculares. The fifth ode, to 


HORACE 


127 


Augustus, urging his return to Rome, and the fifteenth, 
also to Augustus, on the restoration of peace, celebrate 
the greatness of Rome as well as its ruler. Horace, as 
well as Virgil, though in a different way, was a poet of the 
Roman Empire. 

As we look back upon the literary activity of Hor¬ 
ace, we find that he turned at first to satires in hex- 
The literary ameters and epodes in the simple epodic me- 
activity of tre. Then he enriched Roman literature by 
Horace. odes j n imitation of the early Greek lyrists, 

to return afterward to his original style in the more re¬ 
fined form of epistles. It was only at the command of 
Augustus that he once more composed elaborate lyrics. 
His lyric poems are not natural outpourings of sentiment, 
but deliberate attempts to add to the beauty of Roman 
literature and thereby to the glory of the Roman Empire. 
And it is chiefly to these poems that he owes his fame. 
They are not equal in merit, but they are the most per¬ 
fect productions of Roman lyric poetry. As such they were 
recognized in Horace’s own lifetime, and as such they 
have been admired and loved through the succeeding 
ages, never more than in recent times. Countless schol¬ 
ars, poets, and men of letters have read them with delight, 
and many have been the attempts to. render their inimita¬ 
ble charm in translations. But their subtle beauty defies 
the translator’s art. Hone but Horace himself has been 
able to express his delicate feeling and poetic fancy in 
such perfect form. The Satires and the Ejnstles are full 
of brilliant and witty sayings, of critical and historical 
remarks; they throw much light upon the social and 
literary life of the period, and make us acquainted with 
the character of the poet; but the Odes are “ a monument 
more enduring than bronze,” testifying to the genius, the 
industry, the good taste, and, in some cases, to the patri¬ 
otic spirit of the most perfect of Roman lyric poets. 


CHAPTER X 


TIBULLUS—PROPERTIUS—THE LESSER POETS 

Roman society—The amorous elegy—Cornelius Gallus, 70-27 b. c. 
—Gaius Valgius Rufus, consul 12 b. c. —Albius Tibullus, about 54 to 
about 19 b. c.—Lygdamus, born 43 b. c.—Sulpicia—Sextus Proper¬ 
tius, about 50 to about 15 b. c. —Domitius Marsus, about 54 to about 
4 b. c.—Albinovanus Pedo—Ponticus—Macer—Grattius—Rabirius— 
Cornelius Severus—Gaius Melissus and the Fabula Trabeata—Ma- 
nilius—The Priapea—Poems ascribed to Virgil and Ovid. 

During the last century of the republic Rome had 
grown from a powerful Italian city to be the mistress of 
the world, and this growth of power had been accompanied 
by many changes. The wealth of the governing classes 
had increased enormously. Greek art and Greek literature 
had become familiar in the form of original works and of 
Roman imitations, and with the increase of wealth and 
luxury the growth of immorality went hand in hand. The 
early profligacy of Caesar and Sallust, and the love of 
Catullus for a married woman have already been men¬ 
tioned. These were not isolated cases, hut merely examples 
of what was only too common. In fact, the man whose 
life was pure was an exception in the latter days of the 
republic. Nor were the women of the wealthier classes 
better than the men. The Roman matron, 
of society. w ^° was betrothed at twelve and married at 
fourteen years of age, naturally found herself 
in many instances united to a man with whom she had no 
sympathy, and whose distasteful society she gladly ex¬ 
changed for that of a clandestine lover. Divorces were 
12 $ 


EOMAN ELEGY 


129 


numerous, and were accompanied with little disgrace. 
When Augustus established his power, he brought about 
many reforms in the government of the city and the 
provinces and caused laws to be passed to ensure the sanc¬ 
tity of marriage and of family life, hut his success in stem¬ 
ming the tide of immorality was slight. To be sure, the life 
of his chosen friends and of the court circle in general 
was pure, and even perhaps puritanical; but the spirit of 
the times was so corrupt that even his own family did not 
escape. The immorality of his daughter Julia became at 
last so notorious that she was banished from Eome and 
ended her life in exile. Her daughter Julia resembled 
her in character and met with a similar fate. In the 
later years of Augustus banishments for moral reasons 
were numerous, but it was impossible to bring order into 
the life of a society in which immorality had ceased to be 
disgraceful. 

It was in and for this society that the Eoman elegists 
composed their poems. Elegiac verse had been employed 
in the seventh and sixth centuries b. c. by Mimnermus, 
Tyrtaeus, Solon, and others, for the expression of all sorts 
of personal sentiments, as well as for political purposes; 
but in the Alexandrian period it had been appropriated 
almost exclusively to poems of love. This Alexandrian 
elegiac poetry had been introduced at Eome 
The elegy. ^ some of the contemporaries of Catullus, 
and in the Augustan period it attained a remarkable 
development. The Eoman elegists imitate the Alexan¬ 
drians, and, like them, insert in their love poems count¬ 
less mythological allusions and even mythological stories. 
The fashion demanded that the elegist be learned in Greek 
mythology. Cornelius Gallus received from the Greek 
Parthenius a compendium of mythological tales to aid 
him in selecting proper allusions to the myths. The 
poet’s beloved is compared to Juno, Minerva, or Venus, 
Antiope or Helen; the lover gazes upon his mistress as 


130 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


Argus gazed upon Io ; faithful wives are compared with 
Penelope or Alcestis, faithless lovers with Ulysses who de¬ 
serted Calypso, and Jason avIio left Medea for another 
wife. These and similar allusions are mingled with 
figures drawn from rustic life or from war. The god 
Amor and his mother Venus play important parts in the 
poems. Amor transfixes the poet’s heart with his arrows, 
plants his'foot upon the poet’s neck, makes him his slave. 
The poet sings of the beauty of his mistress, designating 
her by a fictitious name, but one which has the same 
length of syllables as the real name of the woman to 
whom the poems are addressed. The poet is usually poor, 
but offers his songs as the most valuable of offerings, and 
is filled with indignation if his mistress seems to care for 
wealth or jewels. No adornments are necessary for the beau¬ 
tiful woman, and love of wealth is disgraceful. The woes of 
lovers, false promises, faithlessness, the troubles of the lover 
who spends whole nights waiting at the door, the torments 
which love inflicts upon the heart, all these are repeated 
over and over again. So much of all this is conventional 
that it is hard to tell what part of the contents of these 
poems has any truth. Occasionally a line is evidently in¬ 
tended to give information about the writer, and in gen¬ 
eral it is certain that the poems were really addressed to 
some particular person, but how much of the feeling ex¬ 
pressed is genuine, and how much mere affectation, it is 
impossible to determine. The details—the nights spent 
in wind and rain before the door, the quarrels or recon¬ 
ciliations, the voyages and returns—may or may not be 
founded upon real events in the poet’s life. Whether 
they are to be regarded as historical or not depends upon 
their context; but it is evident that many details are 
purely imaginary. 

The three chief elegists are Tibullus, Propertius, and 
Ovid. Of Ovid, the youngest and most voluminous, and 
one of the most gifted among the Augustan poets, it will 


ROMAN ELEGY 


131 


be better to treat in a separate chapter. Somewhat older 
than Tibullus and Propertius was Cornelius Gallus, whose 
elegies were greatly admired by his contem- 
Gallus! US poraries, but of which hardly a trace remains. 

Gallus was born at Forum Julii (Frejus), in 70 
B. c. He was a schoolmate of Augustus, commanded some 
troops in the war against Antony, and held the town of 
Paraetonium when Antony attacked it. He was afterwards 
prefect of Egypt, but indulged in offensive remarks about 
Augustus, and showed his pride by setting up statues of 
himself in various places in Egypt, and having his name 
carved upon the pyramids. When he was recalled in dis¬ 
grace by Augustus his creditors brought suits against him, 
he was condemned to exile, and his property was confis¬ 
cated. Unable to bear his troubles, he committed suicide 
at the age of 43 years. His greatest claim to remembrance 
is his friendship for Virgil, who expressed his gratitude to 
him in the sixth and tenth Eclogues , and, perhaps, in the 
original ending of the Georgies. The elegies of Gallus, in 
four books, were addressed to Lycoris, an actress of low 
birth and loose morals, whose stage name was Cytheris. 
In addition to his elegies, Gallus wrote translations from 
the Greek of Euphorion. Another writer of elegies was 
Gaius Valgius Rufus, a friend of Horace, who 
was consul suffectus in 12 b. c. Of his elegies 
on a boy named Mystes little remains, but they are spoken 
of by Horace and admired by the author of a panegyric on 
Messalla. Valgius also wrote some learned works, among 
them a treatise on medicine and a translation of the rhet¬ 
oric of Apollodorus. 

Albius Tibullus was born near Pedum, in Latium, 
probably about 54 b. c., and was, if the “ Life of Tibul¬ 
lus,” contained in the best manuscripts of his 
works, is to be trusted, of equestrian rank. 
He inherited a large property, but lost the greater part of 
it, perhaps in the confiscations of 41 b. c. Apparently 


Valgius. 


Tibullus. 


132 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


it was restored to him by Messalla, of whom he speaks 
with great affection. He followed Messalla to the East 
soon after the battle of Actium, but was detained by ill¬ 
ness at Corcyra. He also accompanied Messalla in his 
campaign in Aquitania. Nothing further is known of his 
life, except his love for Delia, who appears to have been a 
married woman of low birth ( libertina ), and for Nemesis, 
who is apparently identical with the Glycera mentioned 
by Horace (Od. I, xxxiii, 2). Tibullus died about 19 b. c. 
He was a friend of Horace and was admired by Ovid, 
but there is no evidence that he and Propertius knew one 
another. 

Four books of elegies are ascribed to Tibullus, but not 
all of these are really his work. Apparently the collection 
was made in the literary circle of Messalla, and poems by 
less noted members of the circle were added to those of 
Elegies to Tibullus. The ten elegies of the first book, ad- 

Deiia and dressed to Delia and to a youth named Mara- 

Nemesis. thus, are undoubtedly by Tibullus, and were 
published during his lifetime. The six elegies of Book II, 
addressed to Nemesis, seem to have been written several 
years later. They were left unfinished by Tibullus, and 
were published after his death. The six elegies published 
as Book III are by a poet who calls himself Lygdamus. No 
Lygdamus P oe t name * s known, an d probably this 

is a pseudonym. Whoever the author of these 
poems was, he was a member of the circle of Messalla, was 
born in 43 B. c., and was familiar with the poems of Tibul¬ 
lus, Horace, Propertius, and Ovid. These elegies are ad¬ 
dressed to Nesera, who was probably the poet’s cousin, and 
either married or betrothed to him. They are greatly in¬ 
ferior to those of Tibullus. They lack variety and imag¬ 
ination, and in technical execution they want the graceful 
charm for which the genuine poems of Tibullus are dis¬ 
tinguished. The remaining poems ascribed to Tibullus 
are printed in most editions as Book IV, though in the 


TIBULLUS 


133 


manuscripts they form a part of Book III. The first of 
these is a Panegyric on Messalla , written in honor of his 
consulship, 31 b. c. This poem, which is written in hexam¬ 
eters, shows a lack of taste and a love of rhetorical ex¬ 
aggeration entirely foreign to Tibullus. Lygdamus can 
not be its author, for he was only twelve years old at the 
time of Messalla’s consulship. It was doubtless written 
by some member of Messalla’s circle, and included in the 
collection with the poems of Tibullus on account of its 
subject. The other poems of Book IV have for their sub¬ 
ject the love of Messalla’s niece Sulpicia for a young 
Greek named Cerinthus. The five elegies 
Sulpicia. numbered viii-xii are by Sulpicia to Cerin¬ 
thus. These are very short poems—none having more 
than eight lines—but they express genuine feeling in 
beautiful form, though without delicacy or reserve. The 
seventh elegy—of ten lines—seems rather to be by Tibul¬ 
lus than Sulpicia. Elegies ii-vi and xiii are apparently by 
Tibullus, and the epigram of four lines, with which the 
book closes, is of doubtful authorship. 

The elegies of Tibullus are less learned than those 
of his contemporaries. They contain many mythological 
allusions, but these are simply expressed and do not form 
too large a part of the poems. The sentiments expressed 
are not virile or powerful, but gentle and pensive. Tibul¬ 
lus loves the life of the country and hates war; he feels 
deeply the woes that oppress the lover; the thought of 
death weighs upon him; but love is ever in his heart. 
His poems are masterpieces of expression and versification, 
though they lack the fire of passionate emotion. Two 
brief selections 1 from the third elegy of Book I may give 
at least some idea of the quality of his sentiment: 

While you, Messalla, plough th’ JEgean sea, 

O sometimes kindly deign to think of me; 


I, iii, 1-9, 53-56, translated by James Grainger. 



134 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


Me, hapless me, Phseacian shores detain, 

Unknown, unpitied, and oppressed with pain. 

Yet spare me, Death, ah, spare me and retire; 

No weeping- mother’s here to light my pyre; 

Here is no sister, with a sister’s woe, 

Rich Syrian odors on the pile to throw; 

But chief, my soul’s soft partner is not here, 

Her locks to loose, and sorrow o’er my bier. 

So the poem begins. The poet laments his enforced 
delay at Corcyra, where he is detained by illness. There 
follows a list of the bad omens that warned Tibullus not 
to set out from Rome, then a prayer to Isis for aid. A 
brief description of the Golden Age is introduced, and the- 
poet prays that Jove may grant him life: 

But, if the Sisters have pronounced my doom, 

Inscribed be these upon my humble tomb: 

“Lo! hereinurn’d a youthful poet lies, 

Far from his Delia and his native skies, 

Far from the lov’d Messalla, whom to please 
Tibullus followed over land and seas.” 

The remainder of the poem consists of a description of 
the lower, world and an appeal to Delia. No translation 
can render exactly the qualities of expression which make 
Tibullus one of the greatest among the lesser Roman 
poets. It is only after repeated reading of his poems that 
one learns to appreciate the lightness of touch and the 
technical perfection of this sweet singer of soft themes. 

Sextus Propertius was born in Umbria, probably at 
Asisium (Assisi), about 50 b. c., for he was younger than 
Tibullus and older than Ovid, whose birth was in 43 b. c. 
His family was of some importance and must have been 
wealthy, for although Propertius, whose father was al¬ 
ready dead, lost part of his property in the 
Propei aus. confiscations of 41 b. c., enough remained to 
support him and give him a good education. His mother 
took him to Rome, where he studied law for a short time, 


PROPERTIUS 


135 


but abandoned it for the pursuit of poetry. After the 
publication of the first book of his elegies, Propertius was 
introduced to Maecenas, to whom he afterward addressed 
two poems (II, i; and III, ix). He appears, however, to 
have been less intimate with him than were Horace and 
Virgil. Propertius nowhere mentions Horace, and if 
Horace refers to him at all it is without mentioning his 
name. He was a warm admirer of Virgil and a friend of 
Ovid. Little is known of his life, and it is only because 
his poems contain no allusions to events later than 16 b. c. 
that his death is supposed to have taken place about 15 
B. c. From two passages in the letters of the younger 
Pliny, in which a certain Passenus Paullus is said to be 
descended from Propertius, it appears that the poet mar¬ 
ried and left at least one child. 

Propertius is a poet of love, who expresses as few poets 
have done the tender emotions of the heart. His poems 
are passionate and sensual, without the pen- 
Propertius° f s * ve me l anc ^oly of Tibullus or the frivolity of 
Ovid. The object of his love is Cynthia, 
whose real name was Hostia. She was a courtesan, but 
educated and refined in taste, beautiful and attractive. 
She it was who inspired his first poems, and only in the 
last book does she cease to be the chief theme of his 
verses. The poems are handed down to us in four books, 
the second of which is, however, made up of t^wo incom¬ 
plete books. The appearance of the first book made Pro¬ 
pertius famous and introduced him to the circle of Mae¬ 
cenas. Naturally Maecenas wished him to sing the praises 
of Augustus and the Roman Empire, and from this time 
Cynthia is no longer the exclusive subject of his poems. 
In the fourth book (the fifth in many editions) there are 
four poems on Roman antiquities, in imitation of the Ama 
( Causes ) of Callimachus. Love is, however, throughout the 
subject to which Propertius naturally turns. His poems 
are full of learned mythological allusions, and the situa- 
10 


136 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


tions described or depicted are doubtless for the most 
part imaginary, yet the passionate nature of the poet's 
love is manifest through all his learning and his invention. 
Even though he did not pass through all the hopes and 
fears, the changes of love and hate, the joy and sorrow, 
the jealousy and the reconciliations which the poems de¬ 
pict with such wealth of illustration and such beauty of 
language, he knew as few have known them the varying 
passions of the lover’s heart. Eor the modern reader his 
passion is too sensuous and his erudition too obtrusive ; 
but the genuine feeling expressed makes his poems beau¬ 
tiful in spite of occasional coarseness and constant display 
of mythological learning. Propertius is remarkable for 
the sonorous richness of his lines, and in the technical 
execution of his verse he is careful and accurate. His 
earlier poems admit words of three and four syllables 
at the end of the pentameter without scruple, but in 
the later poems the pentameter usually ends with a word 
of two syllables, showing that Propertius was disposed 
to follow Ovid’s rule in this particular. Like other 
Roman poets, Propertius is professedly an imitator of 
the Greeks. Those whom he claims to imitate especially 
are Callimachus and Philetas, both poets of the Alexan¬ 
drian period. 

One of the shortest of his poems, free alike from 
coarseness and display of learning, is the following, on 
Cynthia’s absence: 

Why ceaselessly my fancied sloth upbraid, 

As still at conscious Rome by love delay’d? 

Wide as the Po from Hypanis is spread 
The distance that divides her from my bed. 

No more with fondling arms she folds me round, 

Nor in my ear her dulcet whispers sound. 

Once I was dear; nor e’er could lover burn 
With such a tender and a true return. 

Yes—I was envied—hath some god above 
Crush’d me? or magic herb that severs love, 


LESSER AUGUSTAN POETS 


137 


Gather’d on Caucasus, bewitch’d my flame ? 

Nymphs change by distance; I’m no more the same. 

Oh, what a love has fleeted like the wind, 

And left no vestige of its trace behind! 

Now sad I count the ling’ring nights alone; 

And my own ears are startled by my groan. 

Happy! the youth who weeps, his mistress nigh; 

Love with such tears has mingled ecstasy: 

Blest, who, when scorned, can change his passing heat; 

The pleasures of translated bonds are sweet. 

I can no other love; nor hence depart; 

For Cynthia, first and last, is mistress of my heart. 1 

In an age of great poets many lesser poets are sure to 
be found. Ovid, in one of his letters, 2 mentions twenty- 
Lesser three poets of the Augustan age, and his list 

Augustan is not exhaustive. Little is known of these 

poets> lesser writers, and few of their works are pre¬ 

served, even in fragments. Domitius Marsus, who lived 
from about 54 to about 4 b. c., and belonged to the circle 
of Maecenas, wrote a series of epigrams, entitled Cicuta 
(poisonous hemlock), which enjoyed considerable reputa¬ 
tion, some elegies on Melaenis, an epic poem on the Ama¬ 
zons, and a treatise Be Urbanitate (on refinement of ex¬ 
pression). Albinovanus Pedo was also an author of epi¬ 
grams and an epic poet. One of his epics, the Theseis , 
narrated the deeds of Theseus, another gave an account 
of a voyage to the ocean, probably the voyage of German- 
icus, in 16 B. c. A fragment of twenty-three lines con¬ 
tains a vivid description of the stranding of some vessels 
in the night, which shows that the author was a poet of 
some ability. Of a poem on hunting ( Cynegetica ) by 
Grattius, five hundred and forty-one hexameters are pre¬ 
served, which show little poetic merit. Only a few brief 
fragments remain of a poem on the Egyptian war of 


1 1, xii. Elton’s translation. 


2 Ex Ponto , IV, xvi. 



138 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


Augustus, by Rabirius. Cornelius Severus wrote a poem 
on Roman history (lies Romance ), and perhaps other 
epics. The longest extant fragment consists of twenty- 
five lines on the death of Cicero, and shows rhetorical 
rather than poetic ability. Ovid’s friends, Ponticus and 
Macer, and several others, wrote mythological epics. 
Iambic verses were composed by Bassus, and other poets 
gained more or less reputation for various kinds of 
poetry. 

Gaius Melissus, a freedman of Augustus, from Spo- 
letum, was by profession a librarian. He was the origina¬ 
tor of the falula trabeata, named from the 
Trabeata* 1 * 1 trabea, the distinctive costume of the eques¬ 
trian rank. This was a national comedy, dif¬ 
fering from the fabula togata of Titinius and Atta (see 
page 29) in the rank of the persons represented, for the 
fabula togata had chosen its characters from the lower 
classes, while the fabula trabeata was a comedy of high 
life. Its popularity was brief, and it disappeared, leaving 
hardly a trace of its existence. Melissus also made a col¬ 
lection of humorous tales (Ineptice) in one hundred and 
fifty books, and appears to have been the author of some 
learned treatises. 

A poem on astronomy and astrology ( Astronomica ), 
ascribed in some of the manuscripts to an otherwise 
... unknown Marcus or Gaius Manilius, is a di- 

dactic poem of unusual merit. As preserved 
it consists of five books, the last of which is incomplete. 
If, as is probable, a sixth book once existed, the whole 
work contained about five thousand lines. Even in its 
present condition it is the longest didactic Latin poem 
except the De Rerum Natura of Lucretius. The poem is, 
as a whole, rather uninteresting, but contains passages of 
great vigor, showing independence of thought and re¬ 
markable power of expression. The author has an easy 
mastery of hexameter verse, in which he is superior to 


LESSER AUGUSTAN POETS 


139 


Lucretius; but with all his skill in versification, his ear¬ 
nestness, his learning, and his originality, he can not en¬ 
tirely overcome the prosaic nature of his subject. The 
poem is uneven, at times prosaic, sometimes rhetorical, 
not often, if ever, rising to lofty heights of poetic fancy, 
but serious and thoughtful. A large part of it is occupied 
with astrology, and other portions describe the heavenly 
bodies. In the introductions to the several books, and in 
digressions, theories concerning the origin of the world, 
the nature of man, and the power of fate are introduced, 
showing that the author accepts in the main the Stoic 
doctrines as opposed to the Epicurean teachings of Lucre¬ 
tius. So he maintains that the world is not the product 
of blind forces but of a divine will: 

Who can believe that masses of such size 
Were formed from particles without God’s aid, 

And that the world did blindly come to pass ? 

If mere Chance gave it us, let mere Chance rule. 

But why do we perceive in stated turn 

The constellations rise and, as it were 

By order giv’n, run through their course prescribed, 

Nor any hastening leave the rest behind ? 

Why do the selfsame stars adorn the nights 
Of summer ever, and the selfsame stars 
The winter nights ? And why does every day 
Return the world its form and leave it fixed ? 1 

Various mythological tales are inserted with a view 
to enlivening the poem, but the author lacks narrative 
skill. The most elaborate of these episodes, in which the 
story of Perseus and Andromeda is told, 2 shows, how¬ 
ever, good descriptive ability and lively rhetoric. Ma- 
nilius is not a great poet, but he treats, not without suc¬ 
cess, a subject new to Roman poetry, and shows him- 

J Book i, 499-507. The same subject is continued through line 
530. 

3 Book v, 540-615. 



140 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


self to be a man of original power of mind and of serious 
purpose. With all its defects, the Astronomica has also 
great merits. 

Many Augustan poets are known by name whose works 
have perished. On the other hand, some poems by un- 
Priapea known authors are preserved. A curious col¬ 
lection of eighty short poems in elegiac and 
lyric metres, all addressed to the god Priapus, or at least 
written with reference to him, belongs for the most part 
to this period. Statues of Priapus, the god of gardens 
and of fruitfulness of all sorts, were set up in public parks, 
in orchards, and other places, and most of the Priapea , as 
these short poems are called, are supposed to have been 
inscribed upon or affixed to such statues. Many of the 
poems are extremely indecent, but many are well written 
and witty. 

Far more interesting than the Priapea are the poems 
falsely ascribed to Virgil, and contained in manuscripts 
Culex wor ^ s * Three of these are “ epyllia,” 

or short epics, composed, like VirgiPs genuine 
works, in hexameter verse. The first, entitled Culex, 
“ The Gnat,” tells in four hundred and fourteen lines 
how a herdsman, lying asleep in the noonday heat, was 
on the point of being killed by a poisonous serpent, when 
a gnat stung him, and, by arousing him to his danger, 
saved his life. As he awoke, the herdsman killed the 
gnat, whose soul afterward appears to him in a dream 
and reproaches him. Finally the herdsman erects a 
funeral mound in honor of the gnat. The poem is a 
mock epic, intended to be humorous, but is not very suc¬ 
cessful. In versification it shows great similarity to the 
genuine works of Virgil, but also in some respects to 
those of Ovid. A poem entitled Culex is ascribed to 
VirgiPs youthful days by Martial and Statius, but the 
metrical qualities of the existing poem show that it can 
not have been written until a later date. Either, there- 


POEMS ASCRIBED TO VIRGIL 


141 


Ciris. 


Moretum. 


fore, Martial and Statius were mistaken, or this is not 
the poem to which they refer. 

The second piece, entitled Ciris , is a little longer than 
the Culex . This poem, evidently written by some mem¬ 
ber of the circle of Messalla, tells the story of 
Scylla, who caused the death of her father, 
Nisus, and betrayed her native town, on account of her 
love for Minos, the leader of an invading army. She was 
dragged through the water at the stern of a vessel, hut 
the gods pitied her and changed her into a seabird called 
ciris. Her father was restored to life and made a sea 
eagle. The third poem, the Moretum (the word denotes 
a sort of salad eaten by the peasants), con¬ 
tains only one hundred and twenty-four lines. 
It is a slight poem, idyllic in character, and admirably 
written. It describes how a poor peasant and his slave, a 
negress, make the moretum in the early morning. This 
poem is said to be an imitation of a Greek original by 
Parthenius. It is possible, though not probable, that it is 
by Virgil. The fourth poem is the Copa 
(barmaid), consisting of only thirty-eight lines 
of elegiac verse. It has to do with the barmaid of a way- 
side tavern, and is clever and interesting, but has none of 
the qualities of VirgiPs poems. It belongs, however, 
without doubt, to the Augustan period. The Dirce , which 
is also included in the manuscripts of Virgil, belongs, as 
has been said (page 63), to an earlier time, and the JEtna 
belongs to the subsequent period. This con¬ 
sists of six hundred and forty-six hexameters, 
describing volcanic eruptions, and attempting to account 
for them. It has little poetic merit, but shows that even 
an indifferent poet could write good hexameters. The 
remaining short poems ascribed to Virgil are of little 
interest or importance, though one of them—a comic ode 
in honor of an old muleteer—is an excellent parody of 
the poem of Catullus addressed to his old yacht. 


Copa. 


JEtna. 


142 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


The elegy entitled Nux (nut tree), and the Consolatio 
ad Liviam (Consolation to Livia), both ascribed to Ovid, 
Nux are imitations by writers of a slightly later 

Consolatio time, and have little merit. The Nux is the 
ad Liviam. complaint of a tree on account of the bad 
treatment it receives from passers-by. The Consolatio ad 
Liviam purports to be addressed to Livia, wife of Augus¬ 
tus, on the death of her son Drusus, in 9 b. c. 


CHAPTER XI 


OVID 

Ovid, 43 b. c.-18 a. d. —His life—Poems of love—Fasti—Metamor¬ 
phoses—Poems written after his banishment—His qualities and in¬ 
fluence. 

Publius 0vidius Naso was born at Sulmo, in the 
country of the Paeligni, in 43 b. c., on the 20th of March. 
Life of Ovid ^- e belonged a wealthy equestrian fam¬ 
ily and received, along with his elder brother, 
a good education at Rome, practising rhetoric under 
Arellius Fuscus and Porcius Latro. He also studied at 
Athens* and at some time traveled with the poet Macer in 
Asia and Sicily. After assuming the toga virilis he held 
two of the minor offices incidental to the beginning of 
the senatorial career, and was employed as arbitrator in 
private cases. But in spite of his father’s remonstrances, 
he withdrew from public life and devoted himself to poet¬ 
ry. This decision was, according to his own statement, 
due in part to his delicate physique, but the chief reason 
was probably his love of poetry and pleasure, and his aver¬ 
sion to serious affairs. His social position was excellent. 
He was intimate with Messalla and his circle, and had 
many friends among the literary men of the capital. Vir¬ 
gil, he says, he only saw, but he was intimate with Tibul¬ 
lus, Propertius, Ponticus, and Bassus. He was married 
three times. His first wife, whom he married in his early 
youth, was “ neither worthy nor useful,” 1 and he was soon 
separated from the second also, though he charges her with 


1 Tristia , IV, x, 69. 


143 



144 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


no fault. His third wife, of the Fabian family, remained 
faithful to him, and he to her. He had one daughter, 
who in turn had two children. His life of ease and social 
pleasure at Rome was brought to a sudden close in 8 a. d. 
by an imperial edict banishing him to Tomi, on the shore 
of the Pontus (Black Sea). “ Two charges,” he writes, 
“ wrought my ruin, a poem and an error, but I must be 
silent about the fault of one of these acts. I am not im¬ 
portant enough to renew thy wounds, Csesar, since it is 
more than enough that thou hast suffered once. The 
other part remains, in which, as author of a vile poem, I 
am charged with being a teacher of obscene adultery.” 1 
The poem referred to can be no other than the Ars Ama- 
toria\ but this was published ten years before the poet’s 
banishment. The real cause of his sentence must be 
sought in the charge about which he keeps silence through 
fear of wounding Augustus. Perhaps he was privy to an 
intrigue between Julia, the granddaughter of Augustus, 
and Decimus Silanus. Ovid remained in banishment at 
Tomi until his death, in 18 A. D. 

Ovid’s poems fall into three divisions: poems of love, 
in elegiac metre, the works of his earlier years; antiqua- 
Ovid’s oems r * an anc ^ m yth°l°gi ca l poems (the Fasti , in ele¬ 
giacs, and the Metamorphoses, in hexameters), 
written before his banishment; and the poems written, in 
elegiac verse, at Tomi. The exact chronological order of 
the love poems is hard to fix, as'the first series of elegies, the 
Amoves, appeared in two editions, at first in five books, 
later in three. The later edition is preserved. Most of these 
elegies were probably written between 22 and 15 B. c. The 
Heroides, letters from mythical heroines to their absent 
husbands or lovers, were written soon after the Amoves, 
then followed the poem On the Care of the Face ( De Medi - 
camine Faciei ), then the Ars Amatoria ( The Art of Love) 


1 Tristia, II, 107 ff. 




OVID 


145 


and the Remedia Amoris (Cures for Love). The last two 
seem to have been published between the beginning of 1 
b. c. and the end of 1 a. d., but need not have been entirely 
written in the space of those two years. 

The three books of the Amoves contain forty-nine 
elegies, nearly all of which are love poems. Among the 
The Amores com P ara tively small number on other sub¬ 
jects the best known and most interesting 
are the elegy on the death of Tibullus (III, ix) and the 
description of a festival of Juno (III, xiii). The love 
poems are in great part addressed to Corinna, who seems 
to be a mere figment of the poet’s imagination, not, like 
the Lesbia of Catullus, the Delia of Tibullus, and the Cyn¬ 
thia of Propertius, a real person under a fictitious name. 
Ovid’s love poems are not expressions of his own feelings 
for any individual, but the means by which he exhibits his 
astonishing facility in versification and his lively imagina¬ 
tion. From beginning to end the poems show an utter 
lack of serious purpose. All the vicissitudes of a long 
love affair are treated with equal lightness and grace. 
Corinna is ill, she goes away, she receives a letter, to 
which she replies unfavorably, her parrot dies, and her 
lover laments it in an elegy; but nowhere does any real 
feeling make itself manifest. The poet seems to wish to 
give a complete series of pictures of the feelings and con¬ 
duct of a lover under all possible circumstances, and his 
lively imagination plays lightly with all the varying phases 
of passion, but it is all play. Some of the poems are based 
upon Greek originals, many contain mythological allu¬ 
sions, a few are heavy with Alexandrian learning, some 
are harmlessly sportive, others extremely indecent, but all 
alike are masterly in technical execution, and empty of real 
sentiment. In these, his earliest poems, Ovid is already 
the most brilliant of Roman elegists. The easy flow of 
his verse is admirable. The rules that each distich must 
form a complete sentence, or at least express an independ- 


146 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


ent thought, and that each pentameter must end with a 
word of two syllables, give great uniformity to the cadence 
of the verses, but in spite of this the variety of expression 
and the clever rhetoric employed preserve the poems from 
monotony. Only the sameness of subject and the lack of 
real feeling make the Amoves tedious to the modern 
reader. 

The subject of the Amoves is continued in the Hevoi- 
des, but in a different form. Here the elegies are suppoced 

The Heroides ^ e ^ ers f rom fifteen famous women of 

antiquity—Penelope, Brisei's, Phaedra, and 
others—to their absent lovers or husbands. The form 
of poetic love-letter was known to the Alexandrians and 
had been employed once (IV, iii) by Propertius, but was 
first made popular at Rome by Ovid, who was also, appar¬ 
ently, the first to write in the character of mythological 
persons. Soon after the publication of Ovid’s letters from 
heroines, replies to some, at least, were written by Sabi- 
fius. 1 These replies are lost, but at the end of the Hevo- 
ides we now have three pairs of letters. Paris, Leander, 
and Acontius write respectively to Helen, Hero, and 
Cydippe, and each woman writes a reply. These six let¬ 
ters are so nearly in the style of Ovid that only careful 
study has led the best critics to the opinion that they are 
not his work, but clever imitations by some unknown con¬ 
temporary. In the Hevoides , as in the six letters just 
mentioned, the fact that the writers are well-known 
mythological persons lends an interest and a dramatic 
quality to the poems, which is wanting in the Amoves, but 
the general character of the work remains the same. 

The book On the Cave of the Face is imperfectly pre¬ 
served, for it breaks off after one hundred lines. The 
introduction compares the highly developed culture of 
the Augustan period with the rough simplicity of earlier 


1 Ovid, Amoves II, xviii, 27 ff. 



OVID 


147 


The Art of 
Love. 


times. The maids and matrons of old may not have 
bestowed any care upon their personal beauty, but the 
Roman girls of the present must act differ- 
of the Face en tly, smce even the men are no longer care¬ 
less of their persons. To he sure, the charac¬ 
ter is more important than personal beauty, for character 
remains while beauty is fleeting. Up to this point the 
poem is attractive, but the remainder, consisting of reci¬ 
pes for cosmetics, with accurate directions concerning 
weights and measures of the various ingredients, is so un¬ 
interesting that the loss of the latter part of the poem is 
hardly to be regretted. 

The Art of Love is one of the most immoral poems in 
existence. The first book gives instruction to young men 
to aid them in finding and seducing desirable 
mistresses, the second tells them how to keep 
the girls’ affection, and the third instructs 
girls in the art of gaining lovers. The love of which Ovid 
writes is mere sensual passion, not the union of souls, and 
his three books of systematic instruction in the arts of 
seduction would be utterly tedious were they not enli¬ 
vened by some striking descriptive passages and myths, as 
well as by sententious lines of worldly wisdom. A remark¬ 
able passage in the first book 1 celebrates the praise of 
Roman greatness and of Augustus, in order to lead up to 
the mention of a triumphal procession; and this is men¬ 
tioned, because in the crowd of spectators the young man 
may scrape acquaintance with a girl. Of the Roman 
women at the theatre, Ovid says: 

Spectatum veniunt , veniunt spectentur ut ipsa, 

They come to see, and to be seen themselves, 

and many other lines show keen observation, knowledge 
of humanity, and no little humor; but, in spite of these 


1 Lines 177 ff. 




148 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


beauties of detail, the poem is, as a whole, so uninteresting 
that its immorality has probably done little harm. 

The Cure of Love offers various means for freeing one¬ 
self from the bonds of passion. Activity and travel are 
recommended; the lover who longs for free- 
Love° Ure ° f ^om * s a( ^ v ^ se( ^ consider the faults of his 
mistress, and the expense she causes him; he 
is told to make her show her faults; is urged to fall in 
love with another, to avoid reminders of the beloved when 
she is absent, and to shun poetry, music, and the dance. 
All this is uninteresting enough; but this poem, like the 
Ars Amatoria , contains many fine details. The Remedia 
Amoris is the last of Ovid’s poems on the subject of love. 
From beginning to end his love poems show the greatest 
ease and fluency of expression, superb mastery of tech¬ 
nique, much imagination, wit, and humor, but an almost 
absolute lack of real feeling and serious purpose. 

With the Fasti , or calendar of Roman festivals, Ovid’s 
poetry becomes more serious. When this work was begun 
The Fasti can no ^ determined, but it probably occu¬ 
pied part of the poet’s time for several years. 
The description of the festival of Juno in the Amoves 
(III, xiii) shows an interest in religious ritual, and it may 
be that Ovid conceived the idea of writing the Fasti even 
before the Ars Amatoria was published. However that 
may be, the Fasti never reached completion. The poem 
as planned was to consist of twelve books, one for each 
month of the year, and was dedicated to Augustus; but, 
when six books had been written, the work was interrupted 
by Ovid’s banishment. After the death of Augustus, 
Ovid began a revision of the poem, and prefixed to it a 
dedication to Germanicus; but the revision progressed 
no further than the first book. As this book contains 
references to events as late as Yt a. d., the entire work 
as we possess it must have been published after Ovid’s 
death. 


OVID 


149 


Poetic descriptions of festivals, with accounts of their 
origin, had been written by the Alexandrians, notably by 
Callimachus, and four elegies of Propertius (see p. 135) had 
introduced such subjects into Roman poetry. Ovid under¬ 
took to treat systematically all the Roman festivals, arran¬ 
ging them according to the days on which they occurred. 
This arrangement often causes related myths to be widely 
separated, and the same myth to be treated in several 
places, thus destroying the poetic unity of the work. The 
poet is also obliged by his subject to regard the astronom¬ 
ical as well as the antiquarian aspects of the calendar, and 
this double interest destroys the harmony of the poem. 
Ovid was not a careful student of astronomy, and the 
astronomical parts of his work contain some serious mis¬ 
takes ; but they are interesting on account of their clear 
descriptions, their variety of expression, and the myths 
connected with the stars which are introduced. The days 
that mark important events in Roman history are treated 
with, especial fulness, and the poet takes every opportu¬ 
nity for the expression of patriotic sentiments, and for the 
praise of Augustus and the Julian family. The descrip¬ 
tions of festivals are lively and beautiful pictures of 
Roman life. Events of the poet’s own times, or of the 
early, mythical period, are described with great variety, 
sometimes in elaborate detail, sometimes more briefly, but 
always with easy and attractive grace. The causes or 
origins of festivals and customs are introduced in various 
ways; sometimes a god appears and reveals them, some¬ 
times they are narrated by a friend or contemporary of 
the poet, or again the poet tells them without adducing 
any authority. The Greek myths narrated are derived 
from some of the many collections of such material 
familiar to the Romans o'f Ovid’s day; and even in the 
matter of Roman legends Ovid probably made no original 
researches. The grammarian Yerrius Flaccus had com¬ 
piled a prose calendar, with explanations of the established 


150 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


customs pertaining to each day, and it is probably from 
this that Ovid derived much of his antiquarian lore. The 
books from which Ovid derived his information are lost, 
and his work is now one of the chief sources from which 
we can gain knowledge of Roman ritual, belief, religious 
antiquities, and even topography, for Ovid frequently 
mentions the relative positions of temples and other 
buildings. To the student of Roman life the six books 
of the Fasti are therefore of great importance. And 
their importance is not less to the student of Roman 
poetry, for they teem with beautiful and lively descrip¬ 
tions and interesting stories, and the patriotic sentiments 
eloquently expressed in several passages show that Ovid 
was something more than the careless, frivolous writer of 
corrupt love poems. In beauty of workmanship, vivid¬ 
ness of description, and fluent grace of narrative, many 
portions of the Fasti are equal to any works of Roman 
literature, not even excepting the Metamorphoses of Ovid 
himself. 

The fifteen books of the Metamorphoses are Ovid’s 
greatest achievement. When he began the work we do 
not know, but, according to his own state- 
morphoses ment, 1 he had finished it at the time of his 
banishment, though he had not revised and 
perfected it to his own satisfaction. In his grief he put 
the manuscript in the fire and burned it, but several 
copies must have been made, so the work survived. The 
opening lines of the poem explain its purpose: 

Of forms transmuted into bodies new 

My spirit moves to tell. Ye gods (for ye 

Did change them), lend my task your favoring breath, 

And to my times continuous lead the song. 

This great collection of myths became almost imme¬ 
diately, and has remained ever since, the chief source of 


1 Tristia , I, vii, 13 if. 



OVID 


151 


popular knowledge of mythology. Poets and artists alike 
have drawn their conceptions of the ancient gods and 
heroes from Ovid even more than from Homer. The 
myths selected are those in which a metamorphosis, or 
change of form, takes place. Collections of the same 
sort had been made by several Alexandrian writers; but 
Ovid was apparently the first to arrange these stories in 
continuous order from the beginning of the world to his 
own time. The astonishing skill with which the transi¬ 
tion from one tale to the next is accomplished, the rapid¬ 
ity and fluency of the narrative, the abundance of charm¬ 
ing descriptive passages, and the never-failing variety of 
expression, make this one of the most remarkable of 
poems. The number of stories told is so great that a 
list of them would be tedious, but a brief mention and 
characterization of some of the more important among 
them will serve to show the scope and variety of the 
work. 

After describing the creation, Ovid gives an account 
of the four ages (of gold, silver, bronze, and iron) of 
Contents of mankind’s deterioration and, of the flood, 
the Metamor- from which only Deucalion/ and Pyrrha sur- 
phoses. vived. The story of Phaethon’s attempt to 

drive the chariot of the Sun is told with great animation, 
though the poet’s display of geographical knowledge is 
somewhat out of place. The tale of the founding of 
Thebes by Cadmus is a striking example of narrative 
skill. More tragical in subject, and more dramatic in 
composition, are the stories of Pentheus, torn in pieces 
by the maddened worshipers of Bacchus, led by his own 
mother and sisters, and of Athamas, who is driven mad 
by Juno and kills his eldest son, while his wife Ino casts 
herself, with her son Melicerta, into the sea. Between 
these two stories are several less dramatic tales, among 
them the sentimental idyll of Pyramus and Thisbe, which 
is burlesqued in Shakespeare’s Midsummer Night's Dream . 

11 


152 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


The deeds of Perseus, his rescue of Andromeda from the 
sea-monster, their wedding, with the quarrel that arose, 
and the turning into stone of Perseus’s enemies by means 
of the terrible Gorgon’s head, are narrated with vivid 
detail. The story of Proserpine, carried off by Pluto and 
sought all over the world by her mother Ceres, is enriched 
and retarded by the insertion of all manner of geograph¬ 
ical, antiquarian, and mythological details. The tale of 
the pride and grief of Niobe is told with tragic pathos. 
In telling of Medea’s love for Jason, Ovid imitates to 
some extent the portrayal of her mental torments given 
by Apollonius of Rhodes, 1 and at the same time displays 
his own liking for rhetorical argument. The adventures 
of Cephalus and Procris, Msus and Scylla, Daedalus and 
Icarus, and others, are more simply told. The story of 
the Calydonian boar-hunt and the death of Meleager, 
enables Ovid to show his ability in description, narrative, 
and psychological analysis. The charming idyll of the 
pious and hospitable rustics, Philemon and Baucis, rests 
the mind of the reader after the preceding tales of vio¬ 
lence. The deeds of Hercules follow, then the story of 
Orpheus, in which are inserted numerous tales, as if told 
by Orpheus himself. The account of the terrible death 
of Orpheus is followed by the story of Midas, who turned 
all things to gold by his touch, and whose ears were 
changed into those of an ass because he declared Pan to 
he a better musician than Apollo. The transformation 
of Ceyx and Alcyone into sea-gulls gives the poet an 
opportunity to tell of and praise conjugal fidelity. The 
combat of the centaurs and Lapithae is told at some 
length, with too many names and too little unity. Many 
tales are told in connection with the Trojan war. Among 
these, the strife of Ajax and Ulysses for the armor of 


1 Argonautica, III, 750 If. Virgil, JEneid, IV, 522 if., imitates 
Apollonius more closely. 



OVID 


153 


Achilles occupies a prominent position, and Ovid shows 
his rhetorical tendency by introducing set speeches by 
the two rivals in support of their claims. With the fall 
of Troy and the escape of iEneas, the poem begins to deal 
with Roman rather than Greek subjects. The earlier 
adventures of iEneas and others after the fall of Troy 
are, to be sure, still derived from Greek sources, but the 
stories of the combats in Italy and of the founding of 
Rome are no longer Greek. Near the end of the poem 
the Pythagorean doctrine of the transmigration of souls 
is set forth in considerable detail. Several Roman stories 
follow, and at last comes the account of Julius Caesar’s 
ascent to the gods, and a prophecy of a similar fortune 
for Augustus. Then the poem ends with the lines: 

And now my work is done; which not Jove’s wrath, 

Nor fire, nor sword, nor all-consuming age 
Can e’er destroy. Let when it will that day, 

Which only o’er this body’s frame has power, 

Make ending of my life’s uncertain space; 

Yet shall the better part of me be borne 
Above the lofty stars through countless years, 

And ever undestroyed shall be my name. 

Where’er the Roman power o’er conquered lands 
Extends, shall I be read by many tongues, 

And through all ages, if there’s aught of truth 
In prophecies of bards, my fame shall live. 

Certainly Ovid had written a most remarkable poem. 
At times the lack of earnestness so noticeable in his earlier 
works appears also in the Metamorphoses , but frequently 
he is carried along by his subject to utterances of real 
power and pathos. His hexameters have not the swelling 
grandeur of Virgil’s, but they have a fluent rapidity and 
easy grace that no other Latin writer ever attained. Nor 
does any other Roman poet equal Ovid in the art of tell¬ 
ing a story. He is a master of direct, simple narrative 
and of clear, vivid description, and he excels also in 


154 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


dramatic presentation and in the analysis of human 
thoughts and feelings. 

In the Metamorphoses Ovid’s power is at its height. His 
later poems, written after his banishment, show a constant 
deterioration in every respect, even in technique. The 
long series of laments over his exile is tedious and weari¬ 
some. The five books entitled Tristia consist of elegies 
addressed for the most part to no one person, while the 
four hooks of Letters from the Pontus (Ex Ponto) have 
the form of real letters to the poet’s friends. The second 
book of the Tristia is one long letter of appeal to Augus¬ 
tus. The short poem entitled Ibis is an elaborate heap¬ 
ing up of curses and maledictions against an enemy to 
whom the fictitious name of Ibis is given, and the Halieu- 
tica is a fragment (134 lines) of a poem on fishes. Among 
all these poems those in which Ovid refers to his own cir¬ 
cumstances are the most interesting. It is from these 1 * 
that most of our information about his life is derived. In 
some of these elegies the tone of genuine feeling, which is 
wanting in the earlier poems, is evident: 

When in my mind of that night the sorrowful vision arises, 

Which was the end of my life spent in the city of Rome, 

When I remember the night when I parted from all that was 
dearest, 

Sadly a piteous tear falls even now from my eyes. 3 

So Ovid sings of his departure from Rome. His letters 
to his wife 3 and the letter to his daughter Perilla 4 are 
among the most attractive of these poems of bitter exile 
and grief. But even upon these the bitterness of the 
exile’s lot casts its shadow. A greater poet, or a poet of 
greater character, might have soared above his grief and 

1 Especially Tristia, IY, x. * Ibid., I, iii, 1-4. 

3 Ibid., I, vi, III, iii, IV, iii, y, ii, 1-44, x i, xiv, Ex Ponto , I, iv, 

ill, l. 

4 Tristia, III, vii. 



OVID 


155 


disappointment; but Ovid wearies us with his continued 
complaints. 

Several works by Ovid have been lost. The most 
important was probably his tragedy Medea , which was 
regarded as one of the greatest of Roman tragedies. Only 
two fragments of this play remain, from one of which we 
learn that Ovid represented Medea in a state of excite¬ 
ment bordering upon madness. Of a work in hexameters 
on the constellations, entitled Phenomena , and a series 
of epigrams, a few brief fragments remain. Not even 
fragments are preserved of a bridal song (Epithalamium) 
for Fabius Maximus, an elegy on the death of Messalla, a 
poem on the triumph of Tiberius (January 16, 13 a. d.), a 
poem on the death of Augustus, a medley on bad poets, 
made up of lines from Macer’s Tetrasticlia , and a poem in 
the Getic language in honor of the imperial family. 

Ovid’s one defect as a poet is his lack of character. No 
other Roman wrote more polished verse, no other em¬ 
ployed the Latin language more effectively for his pur¬ 
poses ; but the want of moral earnestness and power makes 
Ovid, with all his genius, the least among the great 
Roman poets. His weakness is most noticeable in his 
earlier and later works, and the Metamorphoses and the 
Fasti are therefore the most admirable of his poems. 
Ovid was read throughout the Middle Ages, and the myth¬ 
ological allusions in writings of the Renaissance period 
and modern times are, for the most part, traceable to him. 
He was one of Milton’s favorite authors, and several pas¬ 
sages in Paradise Lost show his influence. Shakespeare, 
too, was acquainted, directly or indirectly, with the 
Metamorphoses , and numerous echoes of Ovid’s poems are 
heard in the strains of other English poets. 


CHAPTER XII 

LIVY-OTHER AUGUSTAN PROSE WRITERS 

Livy, 59 b. c.-17 a. d. —His qualities as historian and writer—Pom- 
peius Trogus, about 20 b.c. —Justin, second or third century after 
Christ—Fenestella, 52 b. c -19 a. d. —Oratory—Seneca the elder, about 
55 b. c. to about 40 a. d.— Verrius Flaccus, about 1 a. d.— Festus, third 
or fourth century after Christ—Hvginus, about 64 b. c. to about 17 
a. d. —Extant works under the name of Hyginus—Labeo and Capito— 
Vitruvius, about 70 b. c. to after 16 b. c. 

The Augustan period is the golden age of Latin 
poetry. Prose reached its greatest height in the age of 
Prose Cicero and began to deteriorate soon after 

inferior to his death. One reason for this is the great 
poetry of this development of poetry, which led to the in- 
penod. troduction of poetic words and phrases into 

prose; another is the fashionable rhetoric of the day, 
which aimed not at simplicity and clearness, nor dignity 
and grandeur, but at novel or striking expressions, artifi¬ 
cial arrangement, and subtlety of thought. The influence 
of the rhetorical schools is seen in some of the poetry of 
Ovid and Manilius, but is much more evident in the prose 
of this period and the succeeding times. 

The only great prose writer of the Augustan period is 
Livy. Titus Livius was born at Patavium (Padua) in 
Livy 59 b. c., and died in his native place in 17 

a. D. Little is known of his life, but the tone 
of his writing indicates that he was not poor and belonged 
to a family of some position. He is said to have written 
philosophical works, probably popular treatises in the 
form of dialogues, and a treatise on rhetoric in the form 
156 


LIVY 


157 


of a letter to his son. These works are lost, and can 
never have possessed much importance in comparison with 
the great history to which Livy devoted more than forty 
years of his life. About 30 b. o. Livy moved to Rome, 
where he lived the greater part of the time until his 
death. Probably he visited his native Padua more than 
once, and he travelled also to other places in Italy. He 
was a republican in principle, but accepted the rule of 
Augustus without reserve. In fact, he was a personal 
friend of Augustus, who called him in jest a Pompeian, 
on account of his criticisms of Julius Cassar and his admi¬ 
ration for the old republic. Livy appears in his work as 
a man of conservative tendencies, content to live under 
whatever government happened to exist, provided it was 
not too oppressive, willing to accept the state religion, 
with all its beliefs in signs and omens, while recognizing 
that some, at least, of the omens reported were inventions. 
His one great enthusiasm was for the greatness of Rome. 
This sentiment it was which led him to devote his life to 
the composition of a great history of Rome from the 
earliest times to his own day. 

The title of Livy’s history was Libri ab TJrbe Condita 
(Books from the Foundation of the City). It consisted of 
142 books, the first of which was written be- 
History tween 29 and 25 B. €., while the last twenty- 
two were published after the death of Au¬ 
gustus. The last book ended with the death of Drusus, in 
9 A. d. Whether Livy intended to carry his work still 
further is unknown. The division into books is Livy’s 
own, but the division into decades, or groups of ten 
books, was made later, though it may perhaps have 
been suggested by the original publication of some of 
the books in groups. For the earlier parts of the work 
comparatively little material was available; consequent¬ 
ly the history of the early years of Rome is less de¬ 
tailed than that of later periods. Fifteen books carry the 


158 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


narrative from the foundation of the city to the begin¬ 
ning of the Punic wars, a period of nearly five hundred 
years, while the war with Hannibal occupies ten books, 
and ten hooks are devoted to the eight years from the 
death of Marius to the death of Sulla (86-78 B. c.). 

Of this immense work only thirty-five books are ex¬ 
tant : Books I-X, from the beginning into the third 
Samnite War (753-293 b. c.), and XXI-XLY, from the 
second Punic War to the Macedonian triumph of Lucius 
iEmilius Paulus (218-167 b. c.). In Books XXI-XLY nu¬ 
merous gaps occur. The contents of the remaining books 
are known to us through a series of abstracts made not 
directly from Livy, but from an epitome. Such an epit¬ 
ome existed as early as the time of Martial, not many 
years after Livy’s death. 

Livy derived his material from earlier historians, such 
as Fabius Pictor, Yalerius Antias, Licinius Macer, Clau¬ 
dius Quadrigarius, and Polybius, following sometimes 
one and sometimes another, hut seldom trying to recon- 
Quaiities of cile conflicting statements of his authorities. 
Livy’s When they did not agree, he usually accepted 

History. the statement that seemed to him most prob¬ 
able. He did not try to discover new truths by the study 
of original sources, such as inscriptions and other monu¬ 
ments, nor did he make careful studies of battlefields, 
routes of march, or the like. He did not, as most mod¬ 
ern historians do, try to establish facts by independ¬ 
ent research, but he worked over the accounts of his pred¬ 
ecessors with the intention of presenting the whole of 
Roman history in an attractive literary form. In this he 
was so successful that his history soon became the one 
source from which all subsequent writers drew their infor¬ 
mation. His lack of military knowledge makes his de¬ 
scription of battles and other military matters somewhat 
untrustworthy, and the early part of his work suffers from 
his inability to understand the gradual growth of Roman 


LIVY 


159 


civilization, but such defects are more than compensated 
for by the admirable literary qualities of his history. He is, 
moreover, truthful, so far as he knows the truth, and any 
incorrect statements are due rather to insufficient knowl¬ 
edge than to any desire to conceal or pervert the truth. 
In his accounts of the dealings of the Romans with other 
peoples he is partial to the Romans, but that is because 
his sincere admiration for the Roman greatness leads him 
to believe that the Romans were in the right and acted 
rightly, and his partiality to the Scipios is to be accounted 
for in a similar way. 

It is evident from what has been said above that Livy 
is far from being a perfect historian; yet his history is 
true in the main, and is based upon broad knowledge and 
insight into the underlying principles of human charac¬ 
ter and human actions. He is less interested in accuracy 
of detail than in broader and more general truth and 
dramatic presentation. So in the speeches 
speeches with which he enlivens his work, he does not 
pretend to repeat what the speakers actually 
said, nor even in every instance to put in their mouths 
words that express their individual characters, but rather 
to say in good rhetorical form what the circumstances 
seem to him to demand. In this he follows Thucydides, 
and his speeches, like those of Thucydides, serve not 
merely to give variety to the narrative, but also to bring 
vividly before us and to explain the circumstances and 
motives that led up to the actions narrated. These 
speeches are the most brilliant parts of his work. In them 
he shows the fruit of his training in the rhetorical schools 
and of careful study of Demosthenes and Cicero; but his 
rhetoric does not end in mere declamation. The speeches 
are not written merely to exhibit his rhetorical training, 
but to explain and enlighten. 

Throughout his work Livy appears as the enemy of 
extremes. His admiration for Pompey does not lead him 


160 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


to become hostile to the ruling family; he is opposed 
alike to royalty and to unbridled democracy. At the 
same time he treats his subject with sympathy and 
warmth of feeling, and makes the ethical side of history 
prominent, seeking to present in a strong light such ac¬ 
tions as may serve as models for conduct, not merely to 
give a record of events. 

Livy is unrivalled as a narrator and a painter in words. 
His style is clear and straightforward, although his periods 
are often long and sometimes made complicated by the in¬ 
sertion in the sentence of numerous subordinate ideas, often 
Livy’s style ex P resse( ^ i n the form of participles. As is 
natural for one who wrote when Roman poetry 
was at its height, he introduces poetical words which are 
foreign to the prose of Cicero and Caesar, and some of his 
phrases show poetic coloring. But his Latin is pure, and 
it is difficult to see what Asinius Pollio meant by accu¬ 
sing him of “ Patavinitas ” or Paduanism. In later prose 
writers the striving for poetic effect becomes a disagree¬ 
able mannerism, but such traces of poetry as are found in 
Livy are not the result of conscious effort, but of the lit¬ 
erary atmosphere of the time. His style is not every¬ 
where of uniform excellence ; for it is inevitable that in 
such a long historical work the different qualities of the 
subject and the advancing age of the writer affect the 
mode of presentation, but there is no part of the work in 
which the style is dull or without charm. It is perhaps 
at its best in the books dealing with the Punic wars. 

Livy’s work was even in his lifetime regarded as the 
most perfect example of historical writing. The younger 
Pliny tells us that a citizen of Cadiz travelled all the way 
to Rome merely to see Livy, and when he had seen him 
returned at once to Cadiz, feeling that the other sights of 
Rome were of no further interest. Livy’s influence upon 
later Roman writers was of the utmost importance, and 
his work has served as a model for more than one histo- 


LIVY 


161 


rian in more recent times. His enthusiasm for what is 
good and noble, his admiration for the great men of Rome, 
and his worship of Rome itself, give to his work some- 
thing of the exalted character that belongs to a hymn 
of praise or a panegyric. His great history served, like 
Virgil’s uffineid, to give permanent literary expression to 
the greatness of the past days of the Roman common¬ 
wealth. 

It would occupy too much space to try to give speci¬ 
mens of all the varieties of Livy’s style and composition. 
His descriptions of battles, among which that of the de¬ 
feat of Antiochus at Magnesia 1 deserves special mention, 
are masterpieces of painting in words, even when they 
betray his lack of military knowledge, and his summaries 
of the characters of important persons are admirable. The 
introduction to the history of the war with Hannibal, with 
the description of the siege of Saguntum, the hesitation 
at Rome, and the scene in the Carthaginian senate, is un¬ 
surpassed. The speech of Hanno, who alone 
H^nno ° f am( >ng the Carthaginian senators wished to 
preserve peace by relinquishing Saguntum 
and delivering Hannibal into the hands of the Romans, is 
one of the most remarkable of the many striking passages 
in this wonderful history : 2 

You have sent to the army, adding, as it were, fuel to the fire, a 
youth who burns with the desire of ruling, and who sees only one 
way to his end, if he lives girt with arms and legions, sowing 
from wars the seed of wars. You have therefore nourished this fire 
with which you are now burning. Your armies are now surround¬ 
ing Saguntum, which the treaty forbids them to approach; pres¬ 
ently the Roman legions will surround Carthage under the leader¬ 
ship of those same gods by whom in the last war the broken 
treaties were avenged. Do you not know the enemy, or yourselves, 
or the fortune of the two peoples ? Your good general refused to 
admit to his camp envoys who came from allies in behalf of allies; 


1 xxxvii, 39 ff. 


3 xxi, 10. 



162 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


they, nevertheless, though refused admittance where even the en¬ 
voys of enemies are not forbidden to enter, have come to us; they 
demand restitution in accordance with the treaty; that there may 
be no deceit on the part of the state, they ask that the author of 
the wrong and the accused person be delivered up. The more 
gently they act, the more slowly they begin, the more persistently, 
I fear, they will rage when once they have begun. Place before 
your eyes the iEgates islands and Eryx and what you suffered by 
land and sea for twenty-four years. And that leader was no boy, but 
his father Hamilcar himself, a second Mars, as his partisans will 
have it. But we had not kept our hands off from Tarentum, that is 
from Italy, in obedience to the treaty, as now we are not keeping 
them off from Saguntum. Therefore the gods overcame men, and 
in the question at issue, which people had broken the treaty, the 
event of war, like a just judge, gave the victory to that side on 
which right stood. It is against Carthage that Hannibal is now 
moving up his screens and towers; he is shakiug the walls of 
Carthage with his battering-ram. The ruins of Saguntum (may I 
prove a false prophet!) will fall upon our heads, and the war be¬ 
gun against the Saguntines must be carried on against the Romans. 
“Shall we then give up Hannibal?” some one will say. I know 
that in his case my influence has little weight on account of my 
enmity to his father; but I have been glad that Hamilcar is dead, 
because if he were living we should already be at war with the 
Romans, and I hate and detest this youth as the fury and fire¬ 
brand of this war, as one who ought not only to be given up as an 
expiation for the broken treaty, but if no one demanded him, 
should be carried away to the uttermost shores of sea and land, 
removed to such a distance that his name and fame could not 
reach to us nor he disturb the condition of our quiet state. I make 
this motion: That ambassadors be sent at once to Rome, to give 
satisfaction to the senate; other envoys to announce to Hannibal 
that he withdraw his army from Saguntum, and to hand Hannibal 
himself over to the Romans in pursuance of the treaty; I move a 
third embassy to restore their property to the Saguntines. 

This speech, composed with powerful rhetoric and 
placed in a dramatic setting, serves not only to bring 
before our eyes the fruitless errand of the Roman envoys 
at Carthage, but to emphasize the justice of the Roman 


LIVY 


163 


cause and to predict the ultimate success of the Romans, 
on whose side the gods that watch over treaties were 
enlisted. It is an example of Livy’s oratorical composi¬ 
tion, of his dramatic power, of his desire to show that 
historical events are the result of moral causes, and of his 
conviction that the Roman power was founded upon right 
and justice. 

Livy’s great work was the first complete history of 
Rome composed in fine literary form. The time was 
ripe for such a work. The Roman people had spread its 
power over the whole civilized world, and the peace and 
order established by Augustus made it natural that men 
should wish to read the history of the long struggles of 
the republic that led up to the present peace of the 
empire. Livy’s history, therefore, appealed directly to a 
large circle of readers. But in extending its power over 
the world, the Roman people had come in contact with 
various nations, and it was natural that the history of 
those nations should be of interest to the Romans. The 
task of writing this history was undertaken by Pompeius 
Trogus. By descent he was a Yocontian, of the prov- 
Gallia Narbonensis, but his grandfather had 
the Roman citizenship from Pompey, and his 
father had served under Caesar in Gaul. 
Pompeius Trogus himself is mentioned as a 
writer on zoology, hut his most important 
work was his universal history entitled Histories Philip¬ 
pics, in forty-four hooks. Trogus began with the history 
of the Oriental empires, Assyria, Media, and Persia, pass¬ 
ing from the Persians to the Scythians and the Greeks. 
The greater part of his work was taken up with the 
account of the Macedonian Empire founded by Philip, 
and of the kingdoms that arose from it after the death of 
Alexander the Great. The history of each of these king¬ 
doms is continued to its absorption in the Roman Empire. 
It is from this part of the work (Books VII-XL) that the 


ince of 
received 

Pompeius 

Trogus. 


164 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


Justin’s 

summary 


whole received its title. The forty-first and forty-second 
books contained the history of the Parthians, the forty- 
third told of the beginnings of Rome and treated of 
affairs in Gaul, and the forty-fourth book contained the 
history of Spain, ending with the victory of Augustus 
over the Spaniards. 

The history of Trogus is not preserved in its original 
form, but only in a brief summary made in the second or 
third century after Christ by an otherwise 
unknown Marcus Junianus Justinus. It is 
evident that Trogus was not an original in¬ 
vestigator, and his work was probably little more than 
a translation of a Greek original, perhaps by Timagenes 
of Alexandria, who came to Rome in the time of the civil 
wars. Nevertheless, the work was important, as it was 
based on good authorities. It never became so popular as 
Livy’s history, but it was evidently much used by later 
writers, and Justin’s summary was much read in the 
Middle Ages. Of the style of Trogus it is difficult to 
judge, but so far as it can be appreciated in Justin’s 
abridgment, it was clear and lively, with a good deal of 
rhetorical adornment. Even the abridgment is a valu¬ 
able work on account of the importance of its contents. 

Several other historians of the Augustan period are 
known by name, but their works are lost and have left 

Fenestella ^ ew ^ races * ^he mos ^ important of these 
writers was probably Fenestella, who lived 
from 52 B. c. to 19 A. d. He wrote Annals in at least 
twenty-two books, and probably also a variety of works on 
antiquarian subjects. 

The oratory of this period was far inferior to that of 
the age of Cicero. It was for the most part without 
Oratory serious purpose, and the productions of the 
orators were little more than school exercises 
to show their skill and serve as models for their pupils. 
Messalla, Pollio, and some others continued the earlier 


SENECA THE ELDER 


165 


style of oratory in the Augustan age, but they found few 
imitators or successors. Among other early Augustan 
orators was Titus Labienus, who wrote a history as well 
as speeches. He was so bitterly opposed to the rule of 
Augustus that his works were burned by decree of the 
senate. Cassius Severus made in his speeches and wri¬ 
tings such violent attacks upon the aristocracy that he 
was banished by Augustus, and his property was con¬ 
fiscated under Tiberius. He died in great poverty at 
Seriphus in 32 A. d. Other orators, whose speeches were 
almost exclusively school exercises, were Marcus Porcius 
Latro, Gaius Albucius Silus, Quintus Haterius, Lucius 
Junius Gallio, and the two Asiatic Greeks, Arellius 
Fuscus and Lucius Cestius Pius. Little or nothing is 
known about any of these men except what is derived 
from the works of Annaeus Seneca, the father of the 
Seneoa the philosopher Lucius Annaeus Seneca and 
elder. grandfather of the epic poet Lucan. Of 

the life of the elder Seneca little is known. 
He was born at Corduba, in Spain, probably as early as 
55 B. c., and spent part of his life in Rome. He lived to 
a great age, for his only extant work was written as late 
as 37 a. d. This is a series of recollections of famous 
orators and rhetoricians, written at the request of the 
author’s sons, Novatus, Seneca, and Mela. It originally 
contained ten books of Controversies, or arguments, and 
one book of Suasorice , or speeches advising some par¬ 
ticular course of conduct. The most important parts 
of the work are the introductions, which contain much 
information on the history of oratory. The ten books of 
Controversies treated of seventy-four subjects, the book of 
Suasorice of seven. The beginning of the Suasorice is 
now lost, and of the Controversies only thirty-five are pre¬ 
served. The subject-matter is throughout insipid and 
dull. Such things are discussed as this: “A man and 
his wife swore that if anything happened to one of them 


166 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


the other would die. The man went on a journey and 
sent a message to his wife that he was dead. The wife 
threw herself down from a high place. She was brought 
to herself again, and her father ordered her to leave her 
husband. She refused.” The utterances of the masters 
of rhetoric on such matters as this are given by Seneca, 
whose prodigious memory made him able to repeat them 
almost, if not quite, in the original words. The most 
interesting single theme is the sixth Suasoria , in which 
the question is answered whether Cicero should beg 
Antony to spare his life. The answers given contain sev¬ 
eral judgments on Cicero, among them those of Asinius 
Pollio and Livy. But the folly and emptiness of the 
sort of oratorical study with which Seneca makes us 
acquainted can not fail to impress every reader. Seneca 
himself expresses his disgust. His remarkable memory 
enabled him to hand down to later ages specimens of the 
oratorical teaching which, even in the Augustan age, 
began to corrupt Latin style. Seneca’s own style is not 
far removed from that of Cicero’s time, and Seneca, 
though he wrote under Caligula, probably acquired his 
style in the early part of the Augustan period. The 
specimens he has preserved show, however, that the 
influential teachers of his early days had far less taste 
than he. 

Among the learned writers on special subjects one of 
the most important was Yerrius Flaccus, of whose life 
Verrius little is known, except that he was chosen by 

Flaccus. Augustus to educate his grandsons Gaius 

and Lucius, and that he died in old age 
during the reign of Tiberius. Of his numerous works on 
grammatical and antiquarian subjects one only, On the 
Meaning of Words {De Verhorum Significatu), is partially 
preserved in an abridgment by Pompeius Festus, who 
seems to have lived in the third or fourth century after 
Christ. Only part of this abridgment remains, but this 


VITRUVIUS 


167 


Hyginus. 


is important for the information it contains concerning 
Roman antiquities and early Latin words. A further 
abridgment of Festus was made in the eighth century 
by Paulus, and even this is of value, though it is a 
mere skeleton of the original work of Verrius Flaccus. 
Another scholar was Gaius Julius Hyginus, a freedman 
of Augustus and librarian of the Palatine library. His 
life extended from about 64 b. c. to about 17 
A. d. He composed works on agriculture, 
history, geography, and antiquities, besides commentaries 
on Virgil and on Cinna’s poem to Asinius Pollio. Of all 
these works nothing remains; but two works under the 
name of Hyginus are extant. One of these is a treatise 
on astronomy, including myths relating to the stars, 
the other a mythological handbook entitled Fabulce , to 
which a series of genealogies is appended. The hand¬ 
book is valuable chiefly because the myths told in it are 
taken from Greek tragedies for the most part, and 
through them we learn the plots of many lost works of 
Greek authors. These extant works are, however, not by 
the librarian Hyginus, but by a later writer, who lived 
probably in the second century after Christ. Of the 
Labeo and legal writings of Marcus Antistius Labeo 

Capito. and G a i us Ateius Capito nothing remains. 

Each was the head of a school of writers 
and teachers on legal subjects. Labeo tried to explain 
changes and growth in legal matters, as well as in 
grammar, by the principle of analogy or likeness, while 
Capito regarded anomaly or difference as more impor¬ 
tant. 

A work of no literary excellence, but of great value 
on account of the information it contains, is the treatise 
On Architecture (De Architectural ), in ten 
books,'by Vitruvius Pollio. Vitruvius was a 
practical architect, who built a basilica at Colonia Fanes- 
tris and had charge of the construction of machines of 
12 


Vitruvius. 


168 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


war under Augustus. 1 His books appear to have been 
written between 16 and 13 b. c., and dedicated to Augus¬ 
tus. They form the only systematic treatise on architec¬ 
ture preserved to us from antiquity, and are for that 
reason of the greatest importance to architects and 
archaeologists. The style is, however, inelegant and 
obscure, though its obscurity is due in part to the neces¬ 
sary employment of technical expressions. Vitruvius was 
evidently a man of no great literary education or ability, 
however able he may have been as an architect. 

The age of Augustus is marked by the highest devel¬ 
opment of Roman poetry. Virgil, Horace, Tibullus, Pro¬ 
pertius and Ovid are, each in his own way, the greatest of 
the Roman poets. Only Catullus and Lucretius can be 
compared with any one of them. The only great prose 
writer of the period is Livy. His style is still pure, and 
is certainly very charming; but even Livy departs some¬ 
what from the dignity and beauty of the sermo urbanus , 
the Latin of Cicero and Cassar. The extracts preserved 
by Seneca show that the rhetorical teaching of the time 
was artificial and tasteless, and was leading the way to 
decline, to the so-called silver Latin of the imperial 
epoch. 


1 This is the generally accepted date, but it is possible that Vitru¬ 
vius may have lived somewhat later. 



/ 


BOOK III 

THE EMPIRE AFTER AUGUSTUS 


CHAPTER XIII 

TIBERIUS TO VESPASIAN 

The emperors (Tiberius, 14-37 a. d. ; Caligula, 37-41 a. d. ; Claudius, 
41-54 a. d. ; Nero, 54-68 a. d.) —Phaedrus, about 40 a. d. —Germani- 
cus, 15 b. C.-19 a. d. —Velleius Paterculus, 30 a. d. —Valerius Maxi¬ 
mus, about 47 b. c. to about 30 a. d. —Celsus about 35 a. d. —Votienus 
Montanus, died 27 a. d. — Asinius Gallus, 40 b. c.-33 a. d. —Mamercus 
Scaurus, died 34 a. d. —Publius Vitellius, died 31 a. d. —Domitius 
Afer, 14 b. c.-59 a. d.— Cremutius Cordus, died 25 a. d. —Aufidius Bas- 
sus—Remmius Palaemon—Julius Atticus—J ulius Gracchinus—Marcus 
Apicius—Philosophers—Lucius Annaeus Seneca, about 1 a. d. to 65 
a. d. —Persius, 34-62 a. d. —Lucan, 39-65 a. d.— Calpurnius, about 60 
a. d. —Pomponius Secundus, about 50 a. d. —Petronius, died 66 a. d. — 
Quintus Curtius, about 50 (f) a. d. —Columella, about 40 a. d. —Mela, 
about 40 a. d. —Other writers. 

With the death of Augustus the greatest period of 
Roman literature comes to an end. From this time its 
Literature history is a record of decay, not regularly 
after progressive, to be sure, and not always mani- 

Augustus. fested in the same way, but almost constant, 
and hardly interrupted even by the appearance of a few 
writers of genuine ability. With the establishment of 
peace throughout the Roman Empire, and with the ease 
and security of travel from province to province, men 
from all parts of the empire came to Rome for a time and 
returned to their homes, after, perhaps, imbibing some- 

169 



170 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


thing of the culture of the capital, while others took up 
their residence permanently in the imperial city. Some 
men of each class devoted themselves to literature. The 
elder Seneca belongs to one of these classes, the younger 
Seneca certainly to the latter. The influence of the pro¬ 
vincials upon Roman literature could not fail to be great. 
In the hands of Spaniards like the Senecas, Latin could 
hardly remain the city speech, sermo urianus , of the time 
of Cicero. The evil influence of even the best rhetorical 
teaching of the time of Augustus has already been men¬ 
tioned, and as time went on the rhetorical teaching be¬ 
came constantly worse. Moreover, the circumstances of 
the'empire, and especially of the city of Rome, were not 
favorable to the growth of literature. The peace that 
followed the unrest of the civil wars had led in the time 
of Augustus to great literary activity, but the continued 
peace in the subsequent years, when men’s minds were no 
longer moved by the remembrance, of stirring events, 
tended to deaden the imagination and to dry up the 
springs of literary life. In the early part of the first cen¬ 
tury after Christ there are few important writers either 
in Greek or Latin. In the city itself the character of the 
emperor had a powerful effect upon literature. 

Tiberius (14-37 a. d.) was a pupil of the Greek rhetor¬ 
ician, Theodorus of Gadara, and was familiar with Greek 

, .. and Latin literature. He wrote Greek verses 
The relations 

of the m the learned Alexandrian manner, a Latin 

emperors to poem on the death of Lucius Caesar, and au- 
literature. tobiographical memoirs in prose; but his own 
literary interest did not make him a patron of literature. 
ITis suspicious nature caused him to seek out and punish 
all real or imaginary allusions to himself in the works of 
contemporary authors, with the natural result that author¬ 
ship became a pursuit too dangerous to be popular. 
Caligula (37-41 a. p.) had some ability as a speaker, and 
wished to be considered an orator, but his insanity led 


TIBERIUS TO VESPASIAN 


171 


him to wish to destroy the works of Homer, and to re¬ 
move the works and the busts of Virgil and Livy from 
the public libraries, on the ground that one of them was 
without genius or learning and the other was diffuse and 
careless. Although he did not systematically repress 
literature, his brief reign was certainly not favorable to 
its cultivation. Claudius (41-54 a.d.), who came to the 
throne at the age of fifty years, was a dull and learned 
pedant. He began to write a history from the death of 
Caesar, but stopped at the end of the second book, owing 
to the objections of his mother and grandmother. He 
then wrote a history in forty-one books, probably begin¬ 
ning with the bestowal of the title of Augustus upon 
Octavian (27 b. c.), and continuing for forty-one years. 
He also wrote a history of the Etruscans in twenty 
books, and a history of Carthage in eight books. Of all 
these works nothing remains. Some idea of his style 
may be derived from two inscriptions found at Lyons 
and Trent. The first is a speech delivered in the sen¬ 
ate in 48 A. D., advocating the extension to the Gallic 
nobility of the ius honorum, or right to hold offices, the 
second a decree renewing the grant of citizenship to the 
inhabitants of the regions in the Rhaetian Alps about 
Trent, and regulating their affairs. In both cases the 
style is confused and entirely without elegance or merit. 
Claudius also wrote a defense of Cicero against Asinius 
Gallus, the son of Asinius Pollio, who had maintained 
that Pollio was the greater orator. The addition by 
Claudius of three letters to the Latin alphabet shows his 
interest in linguistic matters, but was without permanent 
effect. Under this ruler literature revived somewhat 
after the persecutions under Tiberius. Nero (54-68 A. D.), 
the pupil of Seneca, wrote various short poems and an epic, 
entitled Troica, on the Trojan War. His jealousy caused 
him to be the enemy of other poets, but he paid little 
attention to literary attacks upon himself. On the whole, 


172 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


literature was not repressed during his reign, though 
after the discovery of the conspiracy of Piso, in 65 A. d., 
his wrath fell upon philosophers and men of letters. 

The literature of the times of Tiberius and Caligula is 
less important than that of the following years. The 
only poet of importance is Phaedrus, a freed- 
Phaedrus. man ^ Augustus, w h 0 wro t e fables in iambic 
verse. These are for the most part not original with 
Phaedrus, but are the so-called fables of iEsop, tales of 
Oriental origin, which migrated in writing or in oral form 
to Europe. The Greeks thought them the inventions of 
iEsop, but modern investigations have proved that they 
belong to the migratory folk-lore of India. After the 
first book of his fables, Phaedrus introduces fables and 
tales of his own among those ascribed to ^Esop. The 
whole collection now consists of ninety-three fables, 
divided into five books ; but it originally contained a 
greater number, especially in Books II and V. The fables 
are still, many of them, at least, Jamiliar to most children. 
Such are the stories of the Wolf and the Lamb, the Frog 
who tried to be as big as an Ox, the Fox and the Crane, 
and many others. Phaedrus tells the fables in well-com¬ 
posed verses, but sometimes overdoes his love of brevity 
so as to be obscure. He also points out the moral of his 
tales .too plainly, leaving nothing to the imagination of 
his readers. His language is the simple and easy Latin 
of the early Augustan period, without the rhetorical 
flourishes popular in the following years. Yet it is evi¬ 
dent from references in the prologue to the third book 
that, although Sejanus was powerful after the appearance 
of the first two books, the third was written after 
his fall, that is to say, after 31 a. d. Probably Phae¬ 
drus wrote at least as late as 40 a. d. Of his per¬ 
sonal history little is known. He was born in Pieria, 
in Macedonia, but went to Italy and probably to Rome, 
at an early age. Something in the first two books of 


VELLEIUS PATERCULUS 


173 


Germanicus. 


fables brought down upon the poet the wrath of Sejanus, 
but how serious its effects were is not known. The Euty- 
chus to whom the third book is addressed is probably the 
charioteer who was an important personage in the last 
years of Caligula. Particulo and Philetes, whom Phae- 
drus addresses in the epilogue and the last fable of the 
fifth book, are unknown. The Fables of Phsedrus have 
been much used as a text-book, because they are interest¬ 
ing to young readers and are written in simple, classical 
Latin. 

A poem belonging to the first years after the death of 
Augustus is the Aratea , by Germanicus, the son of Drusus 
(15 B. C.-19 A. d.). This is a translation and 
adaptation of the Phcenomena of Aratus, and 
shows that the author was not only a talented writer of 
hexameters, but also a well-educated astronomer. This 
poem contains 725 lines. Of a poem on the stars and 
constellations in their relation to the weather and the 
like, entitled Prognostica , only a few fragments remain. 
Besides these astronomical poems of Germanicus, the last 
book of Manilius (see p. 138) belongs to this period. So 
also do some of the poems wrongly ascribed to Virgil and 
Ovid, and for that matter, the later poems of Ovid himself. 

The only prose writers of the years before Claudius 
whose works are extant are Velleius Paterculus, Valerius 
Maximus, and Celsus. Gaius Velleius Pater¬ 
culus was an officer who had served under 
Tiberius; he was tribunus militum in 1 a. d. 
and praetor-elect in 14 A. d. The latest date mentioned 
in his Roman History is the consulship of Vinicius, 30 A. d. 
The dates of his birth and death are unknown. The Ro¬ 
man History consists of two books, the first of which is 
imperfectly preserved. Velleius does not confine himself 
strictly to Roman affairs, but begins his work with a brief 
sketch of the foundation of the Greek cities in Italy. 
The early part of the work is a mere summary, but more 


Velleius 

Paterculus. 


174 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


details are introduced as the narrative approaches the 
author’s own times ; yet it is, even in the latter part, by 
no means an exhaustive history. Throughout the work 
Velleius introduces his own opinions and is governed by 
his own prejudices; his history is therefore not especially 
trustworthy. His praise of Tiberius is so excessive that 
it can not be excused even as the enthusiasm of a veteran 
for his old general, and the almost equally exaggerated 
praise of Sejanus is without the shadow of excuse. A 
noteworthy peculiarity is that Velleius pays attention to 
the history of Greek and Roman literature, which would 
hardly be expected in so short a work. The style is clumsy, 
but shows a desire for rhetorical effect. The vocabulary 
is that of the Augustan age, but the pretentious rhetoric 
and the evident striving for variety are characteristic of 
the later time. The chief interest of Velleius is in the 
character of the persons of whom he writes, and his whole 
work has something personal about it which distinguishes 
it from a mere record of events. In the early part of the 
work he follows good authorities, though he often dis¬ 
agrees with Livy, perhaps on account of Livy’s republican 
sympathies. In the latter part of the history he is ui - 
trustworthy, owing to his servile partiality for Tiberius 
and those connected with him. 

The nine books of Memorable Doings and Sayings 
(Facta et Dicta Memorabilia), by Valerius Maximus, were 
written not far from 30 A. D., and dedicated 
to Tiberius. Of the writer little is known 
except that he accompanied Sextus Pompeius 
to Asia, about 27 b. c. He was, then, born probably as 
early as 47 b. c., and can hardly have lived long after the 
completion of his books. Many of the anecdotes contained 
in his work are interesting, but the style is artificial, pom¬ 
pous, and dull. The most servile flattery is given to 
Tiberius, Julius Caesar, and Augustus. The anecdotes 
cover a wide range of subjects—religion, ancient customs, 


Valerius 

Maximus. 


OTHER PROSE WRITERS 


175 


all varieties of character, fortune, old age, remarkable 
deaths, and many more. Naturally, the work contains 
some valuable information, but this is thinly distributed 
through the nine books. The work was, however, popular 
in the Middle Ages, and is preserved in many manuscripts. 
A book on words, especially names (De Prcenominibus , etc.), 
contained in the manuscripts of Valerius Maximus, is by 
some unknown author and is of little value. 

Aulus Cornelius Celsus wrote an encyclopedia, which 
contained treatises on agriculture, medicine, the art of 
war, oratory, jurisprudence, and philosophy. 
Part, at least, of this great work was written 
under Tiberius, but other parts may have been written 
later, for there is no definite indication of the date of the 
author’s birth or death. Only the treatise on medicine 
(Books VI-XIII of the entire work) is preserved. This 
shows that Celsus was well versed in the medical science 
of his day, and that medical science had at that time 
reached a high degree of perfection. Celsus writes in a 
simple, straightforward style, without the artificial rhet¬ 
oric or the poetic phraseology common among post- 
Augustan prose writers. His work was deservedly popular 
among those who wished for scientific knowledge in the 
Middle Ages, was one of the first books printed after the 
invention of the printing-press, and was used as a text¬ 
book for medical students until recent times. Whether 
the other parts of the encyclopedia were as good as the 
treatise on medicine can not now he determined. The 
treatise on agriculture is mentioned with respect by Co¬ 
lumella, but Quintilian speaks slightingly of Celsus, per¬ 
haps on account of defects in the rhetorical parts of his 
work. 

The names of several orators of this period are handed 
down, chiefly in the reminiscences of the elder Seneca. 
The most noteworthy are, perhaps, Votienus Montanus, 
who was banished by Tiberius and died in 27 A. D.; 


176 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


Asinius Gallus (40 b. C.-33 a. d.) the son of Asinius Pol- 
lio; Mamercus Scaurus, who was forced by Tiberius to 
Prose writers commit suicide in 34 a. d. ; Publius Yitellius, 
whose works who brought about the condemnation of Piso 
are lost. f or the mur der of Germanicus in 19 a. d., and 
who died in 31 A. d. ; and Domitius Afer, from Nemausus 
(14 B.C.-59 a.d.), who held important offices under Tiberius, 
Caligula, and Nero. Among these orators, Domitius Afer 
was most prominent as a speaker in court, while Mon- 
tanus was a teacher of oratory and a declaimer. Histo¬ 
rians whose works are lost were Aulus Cremutius Cordus 
and Aufidius Bassus. The former published under Au¬ 
gustus a historical work in which he praised Brutus and 
spoke of Cassius as “the last of the Romans.” Porthis 
his books were burned by decree of the senate in 25 A. d., 
and he committed suicide by starving himself. Bassus 
wrote a contemporary history in rhetorical style, probably 
embracing the reigns of Augustus and Tiberius, and pos¬ 
sibly the end of the republic. Among the grammarians 
of this time, the most important was Quintus Remmius 
Palsemon, whose grammar (Ars Grammatica) was much 
used by the later writer Charisius. There were also several 
writers on special subjects, such as Csepio and Antonius 
Castor, who wrote on botany, Julius Atticus and Julius 
Gracchinus, who wrote on vine culture, and Marcus Api- 
cius, who wrote on cookery, though the extant cook-book 
ascribed to him is a work of the third century. These 
names show that even under Tiberius prose writing, al¬ 
though not so important as at other times, was not en- * 
tirely neglected. 

Philosophy was much cultivated at Rome in this time, 
as it had been for at least a century, but the philosoph- 
Philosophy teachers un der Tiberius and Caligula 

wrote for the most part, when they wrote at 
all, in Greek. Among them were the Sextii and Sotion, 
whose activity was in the later years of Augustus and the 


SENECA 


177 


earlier years of Tiberius, Lucius Annaeus Cornutus, and 
Gaius Musonius Rufus, both of whom were banished by 
Nero in 65 A. d. These men, and others of less note, 
whose doctrines were chiefly Stoic, exercised great influ¬ 
ence upon Roman thought, but as their teachings were 
chiefly oral and their written works were in Greek, they 
must be passed over with a brief mention by no means 
commensurate with their real importance. Sotion was 
one of the teachers of the younger Seneca, the most im¬ 
portant writer of the time of Nero, while Cornutus was 
the teacher of the satirist Persius, and Musonius of the 
powerful ethical preacher Epictetus. 

Lucius Annaeus Seneca, the son of the rhetor Seneca, 
whose work on the oratorical teachers of the period of 
Augustus and the subsequent years has al- 
neeus Seneca reac ty been mentioned, was born at Corduba, in 
Spain, about the beginning of the Christian 
era, but was educated in Rome, where he studied under 
Sotion, the Stoic Attalus, and a follower of the Sextii, 
Papirius Fabianus, besides attending schools of rhetoric. 
His mother, Helvia, was a lady of noble birth, whose sis¬ 
ter married Yitrasius Pollio, who was for some years gov¬ 
ernor of Egypt. Seneca appears to have spent some time 
in Egypt with his aunt, through whose influence he 
obtained the quaestorship after his return to Rome, at 
some time between 42 and 37 a. d. A speech which he 
delivered in the senate nearly caused his death by arous¬ 
ing the jealousy of Caligula in 39 a. d. In 41 a. d. he 
was banished to Corsica through the influence of Messa- 
lina, on the charge of too great intimacy with Julia Li- 
villa, Caligula’s younger sister. Such stories were circu¬ 
lated about all the members of the imperial family, and 
we have now no means of knowing whether there was 
any truth in the charge against Seneca and Livilla. 
Probably the real reason for Seneca’s banishment was his 
connection with the faction of Agrippina. At any rate, 


178 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


Agrippina recalled him from Corsica eight years later, 
after the execution of Messalina, obtained for him the 
praetorship, and made him tutor to her son Domitius 
Nero. His influence over his young pupil was so great 
that when Nero came to the throne, Seneca, with the aid 
of his friend Afranius Burrus, commander of the prae¬ 
torian guards, directed the imperial government. He 
restrained the ferocity of Nero and checked the ambition 
and vengefulness of Agrippina. Owing to his influence 
the early years of Nero’s reign were long remembered as 
a period of rest and peace at Rome. But Seneca ob¬ 
tained and held his influence in great measure by yield¬ 
ing consent to Nero’s wishes, even when they were 
opposed to his better judgment or his conscience. He 
was probably privy to the murder of Claudius, by which 
Nero became emperor, there is no indication that he 
opposed the murder of Germanicus in 55 A. d., and he 
probably had some connection with the murder of Agrip¬ 
pina in 59 A. d. It is natural that in spite of his remark¬ 
able intellectual and social gifts, he was unable to main¬ 
tain his moral ascendency over the emperor. With the 
death of Burrus, in 62 A. D., Seneca’s power was broken. 
He recognized the fact, withdrew so far as he could from 
the life of the court, and in 64 a. d. offered to give up his 
great wealth. But his retirement did not save him from 
Nero’s cruelty, and in 65 A. D. he was accused of sharing 
in the conspiracy of Piso and compelled to commit 
suicide. 

Seneca’s philosophy did not forbid him to have a 
share of worldly wealth and honors. At the height of 
his prosperity he was immensely wealthy, possessing 
estates in Italy and abroad, and having money out at 
interest as far away as Britain. His total wealth was 
estimated at more than $15,000,000. He held all the 
regular offices, attaining the consulship in 57 A. D. Of 
his private life little is known. He was twice married. 


SENECA 


179 


Seneca’s 

tragedies 


His first wife bore him at least two sons, one of whom 
died shortly before his father’s banishment. His second 
wife, Pompeia Paulina, whom he married in 57 a. d., 
wished to commit suicide at the time of her husband’s 
death, but was prevented by Nero. 

Seneca was an extremely voluminous writer, and 
though many of his works are lost, those that remain still 
exceed in bulk the extant works of almost any other 
ancient writer. They comprise tragedies, 
philosophical treatises, a satire on the death 
of Claudius, and a few epigrams. The exact 
dates of individual works can be established only in com¬ 
paratively few instances, and no attempt will be made 
here to treat them in chronological order. Since, how¬ 
ever, it is probable that the tragedies are works of his 
earlier years, they may be mentioned first. Nine of these 
are extant. 1 The subjects are all derived from Greek 
mythology, and had all been used as the subjects of trage¬ 
dies by Greek dramatists. No originality of plot is there¬ 
fore to be expected in Seneca’s tragedies. Nor is there 
any great originality of treatment. Seneca imitates 
Euripides and some of the later Greek tragic poets, not 
simply translating their work, yet inventing few if any 
new situations, and differing from the Greek dramatists 
chiefly in his greater realism and his declamatory rhet¬ 
oric. In fact, his tragedies are a succession of speeches, 
hardly interrupted by choral songs, which differ from the 
speeches of the actors chiefly in metre. In themselves 
these tragedies are feeble imitations and perversions of 
their Greek prototypes, though in them, as in his other 
works, Seneca shows great mastery of language and vigor 
of expression; but their real importance to the modern 


1 Hercules Furens, Troades (or Hecuba), Phcenissae (or Theba'is, 
two disconnected scenes from Theban myths), Medea, Phaedra (or 
Hippolytus), (Edipus, Agamemnon, Thyestes, and Hercules CEtaeus. 
The Fabula Prmtexta entitled Octavia is not by Seneca. 



180 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


reader is due to their great influence upon the English 
dramatists of the sixteenth century and upon the whole 
course of the French classical drama. At a time when 
Latin was far more familiar than Greek these tragedies 
were regarded as the highest expression of ancient dra¬ 
matic art, and were studied and imitated by the drama¬ 
tists of the modern nations. 

The best known among them is, perhaps, the Medea. 
In this play, as in the Medea of Euripides, the part of 
The Medea is treated in which Jason deserts 

his wife Medea to marry Creiisa, daughter of 
Creon, king of Corinth. Medea sends her two sons to 
Creiisa to give her a poisoned robe, which causes her 
death and that of her father Creon. Then Medea, in 
order to pain Jason, kills the two children. The follow¬ 
ing passage is taken from Medea’s reply to her nurse, who 
urges her to flee when the news is brought that Creon and 
Creiisa have been killed by the poisoned robe she had sent: 

Shall I fly ? If Were I already gone 

I would return for this, that I might see 

These new betrothals. Dost thou pause, my soul ? 

This joy’s but the beginning of revenge. 

Thou dost but love if thou art satisfied 
To widow Jason. Seek new penalties; 

Honor is gone and maiden modesty— 

It were a light revenge pure hands could yield. 

Strengthen thy drooping spirit, stir up wrath, 

Drain from thy heart its all of ancient force, 

Thy deeds till now call honor ; wake, and act, 

That they may see how light, how little worth, 

All former crime—the prelude of revenge ! 

What was there great my novice hands could dare ? 

What was the madness of my girlhood days ? 

I am Medea now, through sorrow strong. 

Rejoice, because through thee thy brother died ; 

Rejoice, because through thee his limbs were torn, 

Through thee thy father lost the golden fleece ; 

Rejoice, that armed by thee his daughters slew 


SENECA 


1S1 


Old Pelias ! Seek revenge ! No novice hand 
Thou bring’st to crime ; what wilt thou do ; what dart 
Let fly against thy hated enemy ? 

I know not what my maddened spirit plots, 

Nor yet dare I confess it to myself ! 

In folly I made haste—w T ould that my foe 
Had children by this other ! Mine are his. 

We’ll say Creiisa bore them ! ’Tis enough ; 

Through them my heart at last finds full revenge. 

My soul must be prepared for this last crime. 

Ye who were once my children, mine no more, 

Ye pay the forfeit for your father’s crimes. 

Awe strikes my spirit and benumbs my hand ; 

My heart beats wildly; mother-love drives out 
Hate of my husband; shall I shed their blood— 

My children’s blood? Demented one, rage not, 

Be far from thee this crime! What guilt is theirs? 

Is Jason not their father?—guilt enough! 

And worse, Medea claims them as her sons. 

They are not sons of mine, so let them die! 

Nay, rather let them perish since they are! 

But they are innocent—my brother was! 

Fear’st thou ? Do tears already mar thy cheek ? 

Do wrath and love like adverse tides impel 

Now here, now there ? As when the wflnds wage war, 

And the wild waves against each other smite, 

My heart is beaten ; duty drives out fear, 

As wrath drives duty. Anger dies in love. 1 

Seneca’s philosophical writings fall naturally into 
three divisions: the formal treatises on ethical subjects, 
Seneca’s the twenty books of Ethical Letters (Epis- 
phiiosophical tulce Morales ), addressed to Lucilius, 2 and 
writings. the Studies of Nature (Qucestiones Natura- 
les ), in seven books. The last-mentioned work, addressed 
to Lucilius, and written between 57 and 64 A. d., is by no 

1 Lines 893-944. Translated by Ella Isabel Harris. 

2 This Lucilius has been supposed, though without sufficient 
reason, to be the author of the jEtna (see p. 141). 



182 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


means a complete treatise on nature. Two books treat 
of astronomy, two of physical geography, and four of 
meteorology; for Book IV should properly be divided into 
two books, one on physical geography, the other on 
meteorology. These subjects are treated from the point 
of view of the Stoics, without any original investigation 
by Seneca, who derives his information entirely from 
books. The work was very popular in the Middle Ages, 
but is of no scientific value. Seneca’s chief interest was 
in ethics, and he uses the phenomena of nature as texts 
for his ethical views. The formal treatises on ethics dis¬ 
cuss such subjects as Anger (De Ira , in three books), 
The Shortness of Life (De Brevitate Vitce ), Clemency (De 
Clementia ), The Happy Life (De Vita Beat a), Consola¬ 
tion (De Consolatione , three independent treatises ad¬ 
dressed to different persons), and The Giving and Receiv¬ 
ing of Favors (De Beneficiis , an elaborate treatise in 
seven books). The Letters treat of similar subjects in a 
somewhat less formal way. These works show that 
Seneca had studied with great diligence the works of 
previous writers on such subjects, especially those of the 
Stoics, though the writings of Epicureans had been by 
no means neglected. The moral teaching is, in the main, 
sound and wise, but there is little originality of thought. 
The style is vigorous and effective, though artificial and 
rhetorical; but these latter qualities were so natural to 
Seneca, in common with other writers of his day, that 
they do not detract from the sincerity of the sentiments 
expressed. Seneca is the most complete exponent of the 
Stoic philosophy as it developed at Rome. He is not so 
much a speculative thinker as a giver of practical advice 
for the conduct of life. Like most, if not all, the Roman 
Stoics, he is a preacher and teacher; and as such he is of 
the highest interest and importance. His works were 
much read in his own time and in the years immediately 
following, though Quintilian and others who wished to 


PERSIUS 


183 


revive the Latin of Cicero found fault with their style. 
Their popularity continued unabated for centuries, and 
their high moral tone led to the belief that Seneca was a 
Christian. This belief was strengthened by the composi¬ 
tion, at a comparatively early date, of a series of fourteen 
letters supposed to have been exchanged between Seneca 
and the Apostle Paul. These letters are, however, obvi¬ 
ously forgeries, and possess no literary merit. Seneca’s 
influence did not die with the death of the ancient civil¬ 
ization, but has continued even to our own times, and is 
very marked in the writings of Ralph Waldo Emerson. 

In the Apocolocyntosis Seneca appears as a political 
satirist. The title may be translated Pump/cinification , 
for the word is made from the Greek apo- 
cyntoffs° 0 ° l0 ' with the word for “pumpkin” sub¬ 

stituted for the word meaning “ god.” This 
joke does not, however, appear in the pamphlet itself. 
The Emperor Claudius, who had just died, is supposed to 
arrive at Olympus and claim admittance among the gods. 
The gods hold a meeting, at which Augustus speaks 
against the admission of Claudius, who is finally sent ofl 
to Hades, where he is met by those whom he has unjustly 
put to death. This is the only extant specimen of a com¬ 
plete Menippean Satire , a work written in prose for the 
most part, but containing also metrical portions. For 
that reason it has a certain interest, but its literary merit 
is slight. Nor are Seneca’s epigrams of any great impor¬ 
tance. They are merely such verses as any cultivated 
man of letters like Seneca can write when the occasion 
offers. 

The age of Seneca produced no great poets, and few 
whose works have survived. The earliest of these is 
Aulus Persius Flaccus, who was born at 
Persius. Volaterrse, December 4, 34 a. d., and died at 
the age of twenty-eight, November 24, 62 a. d. At the 
age of twelve, Persius left his native town for Rome, 
13 


184 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


where he attended various schools, among them that of 
the grammarian Remmius Palaemon. At the age of six¬ 
teen he attached himself to the Stoic Cornutus and 
became an enthusiastic adherent of the Stoic school. He 
was acquainted with many of the distinguished men 
of the time, among them Seneca and the epic poet 
Lucan. He was related to Arria, the wife of Paetus 
Thrasea, and his intimacy with Thrasea and his family 
doubtless strengthened his interest in the Stoic philoso¬ 
phy; for Thrasea was one of the many noble Romans 
who found in the Stoic doctrines some moral support 
amid the vice and corruption of their degenerate times. 
Persius belonged to a family of equestrian rank, and at 
his death left a large property. His library he left to 
Cornutus, who edited his poems, consisting of six Satires. 
Persius had written some notes of travel and a tragedy 
of the kind called prcetexta , but these were not published. 
In the first satire he attacks the literary production of 
the time, and the prevailing love of notoriety. This is a 
real satire, in imitation of those of Lucilius or, rather, of 
Horace. In the remaining poems Persius discourses on 
subjects drawn from the doctrines of the Stoics. The 
second satire treats of prayer, the third of the contra¬ 
diction between our conduct and what we know is right, 
the fourth of self-knowledge; in the fifth Persius grate¬ 
fully praises Cornutus, who had trained him in Stoic 
philosophy, and passes on to describe true freedom, which 
delivers men from the tyranny of the passions; in the 
sixth he addresses his friend, the poet Cassius Bassus, 
speaks of his own pleasant life in retirement at Luna, and 
discusses the true use of this world’s goods. 

The poems of Persius were much admired by his con¬ 
temporaries, and later generations, even throughout the 
Middle Ages, read them and wrote commentaries upon 
them. This admiration was due to the moral and ethical 
contents of the poems, though the style also no doubt 


LUCAN 


185 


pleased the perverted taste of the poet’s own times. But 
neither the contents nor the style merits admiration. 
Quality of Persius was a young man of little originality, 
the poems who expressed in his poems only what he 
of Persius. had learned from his teachers. The Stoic 
doctrines he teaches are trite, even the examples he 
cites being derived from books, not from his own experi¬ 
ence; and the style has all the faults of the period. Per¬ 
sius had studied Horace with diligence, and his poems 
are full of Horatian words and phrases, hut they have 
nothing of the grace and charm of Horace. Persius aims 
at striking expressions and novelty of form. He there¬ 
fore avoids as much as possible all that is natural, 
employs unusual words in unnatural order, and succeeds 
in being obscure without being profound. Few authors 
have so undeservedly gained long-enduring reputation. 

A far abler poet was Marcus Annasus Lucanus, the 
nephew of Seneca. He was born at Corduba in 39 a. d., 
^ but was taken to Rome when only eight 

months old. There he was well educated, 
especially in rhetoric, and acquired a reputation as a 
declaimer in Greek and Latin. One of his teachers was 
the philosopher Cornutus, and among his friends was 
Persius, whom he admired greatly. He went to Athens 
to complete his education, and was called back to Rome 
by Hero, who made him one of his circle of friends. In 
60 A. D. he wrote a poem in praise of Hero, which led to 
his political advancement. But Hero’s favor was short¬ 
lived, either because Lucan was guilty of some impolite¬ 
ness in public declaiming, or because Hero was jealous of 
his reputation as a poet, and forbade him to write or 
recite. Lucan joined the conspiracy of Piso, and was 
forced to commit suicide, April 30, 65 A. d. 

Lucan wrote several works, chiefly in verse, but the 
only one extant is an epic poem in ten books, entitled 
Dg Bello Civili (On the Civil War) % ordinarily called 


186 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


Pharsalia , in which he tells the story of the civil war 
to the time when Caesar was besieged at Alexandria. 

The narrative is prosaic and somewhat dull, 
Pharsalia but Medium relieved by vivid descrip¬ 
tions and really eloquent speeches. The 
chief historical source is Livy, though other writers seem 
to have been consulted. Some inaccuracies detract from 
the historical value of the poem. The diction is in the 
main Virgilian, though it is evident that Lucan had 
studied Horace and Ovid. Geographical and mytholog¬ 
ical lore is sometimes needlessly displayed, and the au¬ 
thor’s rhetorical training and ability are too evident. In 
Books I-III Lucan is still friendly to Hero, whom he flat¬ 
ters in Book I, 33-66, though throughout the entire work 
Caesar, the founder of the empire, is the constant object 
of the poet’s hostility. In the first three books Pompej 
is the hero, and Cato and Brutus are spoken of with 
admiration. The opposition to Caesar does not, however, 
in Lucan’s case, indicate hostility to the empire and a 
desire to return to the republican form of government; 
in fact, Lucan’s participation in the conspiracy of Piso, 
which had for its purpose the overthrow of Hero and the 
substitution of a good emperor in his place, shows that 
he accepted the imperial form of government as the only 
one possible. As a specimen of Lucan’s spirit, and of the 
speeches which lend brilliancy to his pages, we may take 
the address of Cato to the Roman soldiers of Pompey’s 
army in Egypt after Pompey’s death, when the army was 
on the point of joining Caesar: 

So for no higher cause you waged your wars? 

You, too, youths, fought for masters, and you were 
No Roman force, but only Pompey’s band? 

Since not for royalty you're toiling now, 

Since for yourselves, not for your leaders’ gain 
You live and die, since not for any man 
You seek to gain the world, since now for you 


MINOR POETS 


187 


’Tis safe to conquer, you shrink back from wars, 

And seek a yoke to press your empty necks, 

And know not how to live without a king! 

Yet now you have a cause worth risk for men. 

Your blood could be for Pompey shed in streams, 

And do you now refuse your country’s call 
For lives and swords when liberty is nigh? 

Of three lords Fortune now has left but one. 

O shame! The royal palace of the Nile 
And Parthian soldier’s bow have more than you 
Upheld the Roman laws. Go now, despise 
The merit Ptolemy by arms has won! 

Degenerate soldiers! Who will think that e’er 
Your hands were red with any battle’s blood? 

He will believe you quickly turned your backs 
In flight before him; he will think that you 
Fled first from dire Philippi’s Thracian field. 

So go in safety! You have saved your lives, 

In Caesar’s judgment, not subdued by arms, 

Nor yet by siege. O base, unmanly slaves! 

Your former master dead, go to his heir! 

Why will you not earn more than life and more 
Than pardon? Let great Pompey’s wretched wife 
And let Metellus’ offspring o’er the waves 
Be borne in chains; take captive Pompey’s sons; 

Let Ptolemy’s deserts be less than yours! 

My own head, too, whoever brings and gives 
The hateful tyrant, reaps no mean reward. 

Those men will know by my head’s price that they 
Served no mean standard when they followed mine. 

Then come, and by great slaughter gain deserts. 

Mere flight is a base crime. 1 

Lucan is certainly the chief poet of the time of Nero. 

Less important is Titus Calpurnius Siculus, the author 

_ . . of seven Ecloques in imitation of Virgil and 

Calpurnius. a ° 

Theocritus. Formerly eleven eclogues were 

attributed to him, but it is now evident that he was the 

author of only seven, the remainder being probably the 


1 Pharsalia, ix, 256-283. 




188 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


work of Nemesianus, wlio lived in the first half of the 
third century. The Eclogues of Calpurnius are close imi¬ 
tations of those of Virgil, but are far inferior to their pro¬ 
totypes. They are attractive, but so much less attractive 
than VirgiTs Eclogues that they are little read. A poem 
In Praise of Piso (De Laude Pisonis) is attributed with 
great probability to Calpurnius. The Piso whose praise 
is sung is without doubt Calpurnius Piso, the rich and in¬ 
fluential man who headed the conspiracy against Nero and 
committed suicide in 65 A. d. This poem is full of imi¬ 
tations of Virgil, Ovid, and Horace. The poem entitled 

Other oems ^ na ( see P- 141) and many of the anony¬ 
mous poems preserved in manuscripts, some 
of which are not without merit, are to be ascribed to this 
period. The prcetexta entitled Octavia , preserved among 
Seneca’s tragedies, undoubtedly belongs to a slightly later 
time, as Seneca and Nero appear in it. So far as its style 
is concerned, it might almost, be by Seneca, though the 
rhetoric displayed is somewhat less effective than that of 
Seneca’s tragedies. The play is interesting, chiefly be¬ 
cause it is the only extant play of its class. Only a few 
unimportant fragments remain of the tragedies by the 
distinguished general, Publius Pomponius Secundus. 

A work of unique interest is the novel by Petronius. 
This author is without much doubt identical with the 
Gaius Petronius, who was proconsul of Bithynia and after¬ 
wards consul, whom Nero admitted to his friendship and 
Petronius regarded as the arbiter elegantice , or judge 
of good taste, but who was accused by Tigel- 
linus in 66 A. d., and committed suicide to avoid execu¬ 
tion. The novel, known as Satirce , originally consisted 
of some twenty books, and contained an account of the 
adventures of a Greek freedman, Encolpius, as told by 
himself. The adventures were strung together with no 
plot, except as the wrath of the god Priapus (a parody of 
the wrath of Poseidon in Homer’s Odyssey) may have 


PETRONIUS 


189 


served as a plot to some extent. The extant parts are 
from the fifteenth and sixteenth books. The form is that 
of a Menippean Satire, prose and verse in combination, 
but the longer parts are exclusively in prose. 

The chief of these is the Cena Trimalchionis (Trimal- 
chio’s Banquet ), the description of an elaborate entertain- 

Trimaichio’s ment & iven b y a r and purse-proud freed- 
banquet. 10 8 man > Trimalchio. The scene of the banquet 
is laid at Cumae, or Puteoli. The house is 
large and full of costly things, but shows utter lack of 
taste. Trimalchio himself is a fat old fellow, who comes 
to the dinner after all the guests have been seated for 
some time. He informs them that it was inconvenient 
for him to come, but that he did not wish to disappoint 
them. At first he plays checkers with an attendant, but 
presently takes part in the feast and the conversation. 
The first course brought in is a wooden fowl sitting on 
eggs, which prove to be made of paste, and to contain 
finely seasoned birds. When a silver dish falls on the 
floor, Trimalchio orders it to be swept up with the rub¬ 
bish. Another course consists of a great boar, out of 
which, when it is cut open by a slave in hunting costume, 
fly live thrushes. Again a roast pig is cut open, and sau¬ 
sages of all kinds fall out. The entertainment has other 
than gastronomical surprises, for a troupe of Homeric 
actors appear and perform scenes of the Trojan War, 
speaking in Greek. At the end of their performance a 
boiled calf is brought in, and the actor who takes the 
part of Ajax hacks it with his sword in imitation of the 
attack made by Ajax in his madness upon the cattle at 
Troy, and offers the astonished guests pieces of meat on 
his sword point. Acrobats also come in, and when one 
of them falls from a ladder upon Trimalchio, he is at once 
freed from slavery, lest it be said that so great a man as 
Trimalchio was injured by a slave. Presently the ceiling 
rolls apart, and a great hoop is let down, upon which are 


190 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


jars of perfumes as keepsakes for the guests. All these 
astonishing performances are made more amusing by the 
naive pride of Trimalchio, who prates much of his great 
wealth, and exhibits his ignorance by trying to make a 
show of learning. One of the guests tells a ghost story 
and another a tale of an adventure with a werewolf. 
Further excitement is caused by a fight between a fat 
little dog brought by Trimalchio’s friend, the stone-cutter 
Habinnas, and a large dog belonging to Trimalchio. The 
slaves then take part in the banquet, Trimalchio has his 
will read, and all weep. After a hath, the company passes 
to a second dining-room. Here Trimalchio has a furious 
quarrel with his wife, who is jealous of a favorite slave 
boy. Trimalchio finally has his grave-clothes brought 
in, and lies down as if dead, ordering his horn-blowers to 
play funereal music. The noise is so great that the po¬ 
lice, thinking something is the matter, break into the 
house, whereupon the guests escape. All this, with many 
more details of the lavish and tasteless expenditure, the 
pride of the vulgar Trimalchio, and the absurd features 
of the banquet, is described with much satirical humor. 
The language of the narrative is refined, evidently that 
of a highly cultivated man. Trimalchio, however, and 
some of the other characters speak the popular dialect of 
southern Italy, which contains many words strange to lit¬ 
erary Latin. Their speech is not without mistakes in gram¬ 
mar, and is full of proverbs, like the speech of Sancho 
Panza in Don Quixote. 

Among the poems contained in the novel, the longest, 
entitled De Bello Civili (On the Civil War), consists of 
two hundred and ninety-five hexameters, in imitation of 
Lucan, with touches of parody; the next in length is the 
Troice Halosis {Capture of Troy), in sixty-five senarii, 
probably a parody of Nero’s poem of the same title. The 
novel of Petronius is, in some places, extremely indecent, 
but is interesting on account of the specimens of popular 


MINOR PROSE WRITERS 


191 


speech it contains, and still more, as the only known 
example of the satirical novel in Latin. It is, moreover, 
full of wit and humor, and shows keen observation and 
much knowledge of human nature as well as of literature. 
The loss of the greater part of the work is greatly to be 
regretted. 

The only extant historical work of this period is the 
History of Alexander the Great (De Gestis Alexandri 
t Magni ), by Quintus Curtius Rufus, of whose 

Curtins! personality nothing is known, but who seems 
to have written under Claudius. The work 
originally consisted of ten books, the first two of which 
are lost. The style is modelled upon that of Livy, and is 
clear and simple for the most part, though not entirely 
free from the affectation of elegance customary at the 
time. Some of the descriptions and speeches are excep¬ 
tionally fine. Curtius is not a critical historian, and fol¬ 
lows Greek authorities selected without much attention 
to their accuracy. Of the other historical works of this 
period nothing remains. The memoirs com¬ 
posed by various more or less important per¬ 
sons are also lost. Among them may be mentioned those 
of the Empress Agrippina and of the generals Gnseus 
Domitius Corbulo, who was consul suffectus in 39 A. d., 
and was put to death by Nero in 86 A. d., and Suetonius 
Paulinus, who was twice consul, once soon after 42, and 
again in 66 A. D. 

Many scientific treatises were written at this time, as 
in the previous period, but two only are extant: the trea- 
Columella tise Agriculture (De Re Rustica ), by Lu¬ 
cius Junius Moderatus Columella, and the 
Geography (Chorographia ), by Pomponius Mela. Colu¬ 
mella was born at Gades (Cadiz), and served in the army 
in Syria. He possessed land in Italy, and in his work he 
has the agriculture of Italy chiefly in mind. The work is 
divided into twelve books, and is the most complete ancient 


Memoirs. 


192 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


Mela. 


treatise on agriculture extant—more complete than those 
of Cato and Varro. It is written in a simple and dignified 
style, more like the prose of the Augustan period than 
the artificial rhetoric of most contemporary writings. In 
this repect Columella is a precursor of the classical revival 
under the Flavian emperors. The tenth book, on gar¬ 
dening, is written in hexameters, to serve as a fifth book of 
Virgil’s Georgies, because Virgil had hardly touched upon 
this branch of his subject. 1 The entire work is dedicated 
to Publius Silvinus, and it was due to a suggestion from 
him and another friend that the tenth book was written 
in verse. Columella’s verse is simple and classical, but 
is greatly inferior to that of Virgil, and less admirable 
than his prose. Mela, like Columella, was a 
Spaniard. His native place was Tingentera. 
His three books on geography were written soon after 40 
A. d., and form the earliest systematic treatise on the 
subject extant. The style is far inferior to that of Colu¬ 
mella, for Mela writes in the affected manner of his 
times. The work is enlivened by descriptions of peoples, 
places, and customs, and is valuable as a source of in¬ 
formation, since it is based upon good authorities. 

Historical explanations of five orations of Cicero by 
Quintus Asconius Pedianus (about 3-88 A. d.) are pre¬ 
served in a fragmentary condition. They 
show great care and diligence, and are writ¬ 
ten in simple classical style. Of other 
works by Asconius some fragments are preserved in the 
commentary of Servius on Virgil. The works of the ora¬ 
tors of this period are all lost, as are the legal writings of 
Proculus and Gaius Cassius Longinus (consul in 30 A. d.), 
who continued the schools of Labeo and Capito. The 
most important grammarian of this time was Marcus 

1 Verum hcec ipse equidem spatiis exclusus iniquis 
Prcetereo atque aliis post me memoranda relinquo. 

Virgil, Georgies , iv, 147 f. 


Various 

writers. 



MINOR PROSE WRITERS 


193 


Valerius Probus, of Berytus, to whom Jerome assigns the 

date 56 A. D. He prepared and published editions of 

Terence, Lucretius, Virgil, Horace, and Per- 
Probus. . 5 . 

sius, paying attention to various readings, 

punctuation, and the like, and commenting upon the 

text. He also wrote grammatical treatises, though the 

grammar preserved under his name is not his work. His 

only extant works are a list of abbreviations and parts of 

the commentaries on Virgil. 


CHAPTER XIV 

THE FLAVIAN EMPERORS-THE SILVER AGE 


Vespasian, 69-79 a. d. —Titus, 79-81 a. d. —Domitian, 81-96 a. d. 
—Valerius Flaccus, died about 90 a. d. —Silius Italicus, 25-101 a. d.— 
Statius, about 40 to about 95 a. d. —The father of Statius, about 15 - 
80 a. d. —Saleius Bassus, about 70 a. d.—C uriatius Maternus, about 70 
a. d. —Martial, about 40 to about 104 a. d. —Pliny the elder, 23-79 A. d. 
— Frontinus, praetor 70 a. d.— Quintilian, about 35 to about 100 a. d. 


The Flavian 
emperors. 


The death of Xero was followed by a year of disorder, 
in which Galha, Otho, and Vitellius were successively 
raised to the highest power, overthrown, and 
killed. But the terror which had brooded 
over Rome in the latter years of Xero’s rule 
passed away with the coming of the Flavian emperors. 
Vespasian (69-79 a. d.) and Titus (79-81 a. d.) were firm 
but gentle rulers. Both were chiefly known as brave 
soldiers and able generals, but neither was uncultured or 
without literary interests. Vespasian wrote memoirs and 
Titus composed in 76 a. d. a poem on a comet. Their in¬ 
terest in literature and intellectual pursuits was, however, 
exhibited less by their own productions than in other 
ways. Vespasian was liberal to poets and artists; he paid 
attention to dramatic performances; he caused the three 
thousand bronze tablets destroyed in the burning of the 
capitol to be replaced by copies ; and provided for the 
payment of rhetors, or instructors in oratory, by the state, 
being thus the first to establish a system of public educa¬ 
tion. The banishment of philosophers and astrologers 
during his reign was due to the reactionary politics of the 
philosophers, not to any opposition to philosophy on his 
194 


THE FLAVIAN EMPERORS 


195 


part. Domitian (81-96 a. d.) was a very different charac¬ 
ter. Before his accession to the imperial power he ex¬ 
hibited a taste for poetry which led the writers of the day 
to flatter him as if he were one of the greatest of poets; 
but when he became emperor he relinquished all literary 
pursuits. No works by him are mentioned except a poem 
on the battle that took place at the capitol in 69 A. d. and 
a treatise on the care of the hair, a subject in which he 
was interested on account of his baldness. Nevertheless 
he restored the libraries which had been burned, and in¬ 
stituted public games in which dramatists, poets, and 
orators took part. But his jealousy and cruelty were 
greater than his literary interests. Twice, in 89 and 93 
A. d., the philosophers and astrologers were banished from 
Rome, and though these acts may be excused on the 
ground of political expediency, no such excuse can be 
found for the cruelty which led him to persecute authors 
and put them to death on the flimsiest pretexts. The 
last years of his reign were a period of terror for men of 
letters even more than for his other subjects. 

Under Vespasian, the mad terror of the reign of Nero 
was succeeded by a period of calm. In literature also 
greater dignity and better taste succeeds to the exagger¬ 
ated rhetoric of the preceding years. The writers of the 
Flavian period—the so-called Silver Age of Roman litera¬ 
ture—revert to the manner of the great Augustan writers. 
Tacitus alone develops a style of marked originality, and 
Tacitus is the only really great writer of this period. 
The others, foremost among whom are Quintilian, Statius, 
and the elder Pliny, show learning and judgment, but not 
genius. 

The earliest poet of the Flavian epoch is Gaius Va¬ 
lerius Flaccus, whose only known work is an epic poem 
entitled Argonautica , on the adventures of Jason and 
his comrades in quest of the golden fleece. A reference 
to the capture of Jerusalem by Titus shows that the 


196 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


earlier part of the poem was written not long after 70 A. d., 
and the mention of the eruption of Vesuvius proves that 
it was not completed until after 79 a. d. The 
FLaoous! poet died shortly before 90 A. d. Further 
than this nothing is known of his life. The 
story of the Argonautic expedition was told in the 
Argonautica of the Greek poet Apollonius Rhodius in 
the third century B. c., and Valerius Flaccus imitates 
Apollonius in his general treatment of the subject, some¬ 
times even translating his words; but he amplifies some 
scenes which Apollonius had treated briefly and adds 
some new elements to the tale, while on the other hand 
he omits much of the superfluous learning displayed 
by Apollonius and narrates briefly parts of the story 
which the Greek poet had told at greater length. In 
general, when Valerius changes the treatment of Apol¬ 
lonius the change is for the better. For instance, in the 
Latin poem, when Jason reaches Colchis, he finds iEetes 
hard pressed by a hostile army, and receives from him 
the promise of the golden fleece in return for his assist¬ 
ance in the war. When the enemy is defeated JEetes 
breaks his promise, and Jason is thus justified in accept¬ 
ing the aid of Medea and her magic arts. Nothing of 
all this is to be found in Apollonius, and the Roman 
poet has made a decided addition to the plot of the 
story. Valerius pays more attention to character paint¬ 
ing than Apollonius, and is especially successful in 
making the characters of iEetes and Jason stand out in 
strong relief. His description of the mental struggles 
of Medea, torn between her love for Jason and her duty 
to her father and her country, is far more effective than 
that of Apollonius or even than Virgil’s description of 
Dido’s love for iEneas, which reminds one of Apollonius. 
In diction Valerius imitates Virgil, though his style is 
far less simple and clear than Virgil’s, and in the treat¬ 
ment of many episodes of the poem he copies Virgil’s 


SILIUS 1TALICUS 


197 


treatment of similar themes; the work shows also the 
influence of Ovid and of Seneca’s tragedies. In its pres¬ 
ent condition the Argonautica breaks off in the eighth 
book, leaving the tale incomplete; but whether the 
remainder of the poem is lost or was never written can not 
be determined. 

Silius Italicus, whose whole name was Tiberius Cattius 
Silius Italicus, chose for the subject of his epic a Roman 

.... theme, the second Punic War. He was born 

Silius . 

Italicus. * n 25 A - D * an( ^ starved himself to death on 
account of an incurable disease in 101 A. d. 
He is said to have been an informer ( delator ) under Hero, 
but rose to the consulship in 68 A. d., and was afterwards 
governor of Asia under Vespasian. The latter part of 
his life was spent in honorable retirement in Campania. 
Here he devoted himself to literature and wrote the 
seventeen books of the Punica, in which he tells the 
story of the second Punic War to the decisive battle of 
Zama, in 202 B. c. His historical information is derived 
from Livy, and is therefore correct in all essential 
matters. The events of the war are described in chrono¬ 
logical order. The style is an imitation of Homer and 
Virgil, and the imitation extends to more than mere 
style, for the traditional epic machinery of gods, prophe¬ 
cies, heroes, and the like, is employed as freely as if the 
second Punic War were as mythical as the adventures of 
^Eneas. So Juno strives to give Hannibal the victory, 
while Venus aids the Romans. The sea-god Proteus fore¬ 
tells the course of the war to a Carthaginian fleet, and 
Hannibal, with his crested helmet, his sword, and his 
spear “fatal to thousands,” rages about the walls of 
Saguntum like Achilles at the siege of Troy. In short, 
Silius, having no poetic inspiration or imagination of his 
own, uses in his account of the Punic War the methods 
which had been appropriately applied to the myths of 
earlier days by Homer and Virgil. As a result, the 


198 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


Punica, though written in good hexameters, is hopelessly 
dull and uninteresting. The so-called Homerus Latinus , 
or llias Latina , an epitome of the Biad in one thousand 
and seventy hexameters, is attributed to the earlier years 
of Silius Italicus. It attained considerable popularity, 
but is a work of little merit. 

The most eminent poet of this period was Publius 
Papinius Statius. He was born at Naples, probably about 
Statius 10 a. d., but spent most of his life at Rome, 
though he returned to Naples, probably in 
94 A. d. The last date to which reference is made in his 
poems is 95 a. d. His father was of a distinguished but 
not wealthy family, and attained some distinction as a 
poet and teacher, first at Naples, and later at Rome, 
where Domitian was among his pupils. He had intended 
to write a poem on the eruption of Vesuvius in 79 A. D., 
but was prevented by death, which must therefore have 
come upon him about 80 A. d. From him Statius 
received his early education and his first impulse toward 
poetry. Statius won prizes for poetry at the Augustalia 
at Naples, and at Alba, but failed to win a prize at the 
Capitolia in Rome. This was probably in 94 A. d., and 
his retirement to Naples may have been due to his dis¬ 
appointment. He was married to a widow named Claudia, 
who had a daughter by her former husband; but Statius 
had no children of his own. Domitian regarded him 
with favor, gave him a supply of running water for his 
country house at Alba, and invited him to his table. 
These few details of his life are derived from his poems, 
chiefly from a poem in honor of his father’s memory, 
which is published as the third in the fifth book of the 
SUvcb. 

The chief work of Statius is the Thebais , an epic 
poem in twelve books, the subject of which is the strife 
between the two sons of (Edipus, Eteocles and Polynices, 
and the legendary history of Thebes to the death of 


STATIUS 


199 


Creon. This work occupied the poet for twelve years, 
probably about 80-92 a. d. His other extant works are 
_ , , the Silvce , a collection of shorter poems on 

Statius. various sub]ects, divided into five books, 
and the Achilleis. None of the poems con¬ 
tained in the Silvce appears to have been written before 
91 or 92 A. d., and the fifth book, which has no preface 
and which contains some incomplete poems, was prob¬ 
ably published after the poet’s death. The Achilleis 
was to be an account of the life of Achilles, embracing 
the story of the Trojan War, but it breaks off in the 
second book, before Achilles reaches Troy. The only 
lost works of Statius to which any reference exists are 
a pantomime entitled Agave , and an epic on Domitian’s 
German war; but the latter work was probably never 
completed. 

Statius was an ardent admirer of Virgil, and the 
Thebais is an elaborate imitation of the jEneid. Not 
The Thebais on ty Virgil’s language is imitated, but the 
division of the poem into twelve books, the 
general chronological sequence of events, the arrange¬ 
ment by which the scenes of combat begin with the 
seventh book, and the treatment of many individual 
scenes are adopted from the JEneid. The subject of the 
Thehais had been treated by many previous poets, and 
Statius could find the story in various mythological hand¬ 
books. It is therefore not certain, though not improb¬ 
able, that he followed the version given by Antimachus 
in his Thebais , written in the fifth century B. c. Statius 
is not a great epic poet. He lacks the sense of propor¬ 
tion and has little dramatic power, in spite of the fact 
that he evidently aims at dramatic effect. He excels in 
descriptions and similes, but devotes far too much space 
to each; his similes especially become wearisome. The 
entire poem lacks the charm of true poetic inspiration. 
It is learned and correct, but artificial, imitative, and 
14 


200 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


tedious. One of the briefest of the powerful descriptions 
in the Thebais , and one which shows Statius’s liking for 
what is horrible and painful, is that of (Edipus, when he 
hears of the death of his sons and comes forth to lament 
over their bodies: 

But when their father heard the tale of crime, 

He rushed from the deep shadows where he dwelt, 

And on the cruel threshold brought to view 
His half-dead form; his hoary locks unkempt 
Were vile with ancient filth, and stiff with gore 
The hair that veiled his Fury-driven head; 

His mouth and cheeks were sunken deep, and clots 
Of blood were remnants of his torn-out eyes. 1 

The Achilleis has much the same good and bad quali¬ 
ties as the Thebais, and is less wearisome only because it 
The Achilleis ^ ess l° n g- I n the SifoCB Statius shows to 
and the better advantage. These occasional poems 
silvae. were evidently written for the most part in 

haste. In fact Statius says in his preface to the first book 
that none of the poems contained in it occupied him 
more than two dayg, and one of these poems contains 277 
lines. The poems were written chiefly to please some 
noble or wealthy patron, and the subjects are in many 
cases trivial, such as a parrot, a fine bath-house, or a 
beautiful tree belonging to the person addressed. Such 
works call for little poetic fervor, but merely for skill in 
writing verses, and that Statius possessed in remarkable 
measure. Nearly all the poems are in hexameters, only 
six, among them one in celebration of Lucan’s birthday, 
being in other metres. There is more or less padding in 
the poems; invocations of the Muses or of gods take up 
considerable space, and mythological allusions are need¬ 
lessly multiplied; but these things are excusable in a 
poet who writes to order to please a patron. Of all the 
poems of Statius the most pleasing is one of only nine- 


1 Thebais , xi, 580-585. 



MARTIAL 


201 


teen lines addressed to Sleep, the “youth, most gentle 
of the gods.” The wakeful poet begs Sleep to come, but 
does not ask him to spread all his wings over his eyes, hut 
merely to touch him with his wand, or pass lightly over 
him. The Thebais and the Achilleis attained immediate 
popularity, and continued to be much read and admired 
in the Middle Ages; but modern times have reversed the 
former judgment, and such admiration as is still accorded 
to Statius is given him on account of the Silvce. 

The epics of Saleius Bassus and of Statius’s father, both 
of whom wrote under Vespasian, have disappeared, as 
Other poets ^ ave th e tragedies and orations of Curiatius 
Maternus, who lived at the same time. The 
lyric poet, Arruntius Stella, and the poetess, Sulpicia, 
wrote under Domitian, but their works also are lost, for the 
extant short poem attributed to Sulpicia is a product of 
a later time. The only Flavian poet, besides Valerius 
Flaccus, Silius Italicus, and Statius, whose works remain, 
is Martial. 

Marcus Valerius Martialis was born at Bilbilis, in the 
northeastern part of Spain, on the first of March, about 
40 a.d. His parents, Fronto and Flacilla, 
gave him the usual grammatical and rhetori¬ 
cal education at Bilbilis, or some neighboring town, and in 
64 A. D. he went to Rome, where he became a client or 
hanger-on of the family of Seneca and some other impor¬ 
tant families. He may have practised law for a time, but 
lived chiefly from the bounty of his patrons. The ius 
trium liberorum granted him by Titus, was ratified by 
Domitian. He received the title of tribune, which carried 
with it equestrian rank. He owned a small country 
estate near Nomentum, perhaps a gift from Argentaria 
Polla, Lucan’s widow; and at one time he had a house 
of his own at Rome and kept some slaves. Still he 
can never have been rich, for he complains constantly 
of poverty. In 98 A. d. he returned to Spain, and died in 


Martial. 


202 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


his native place not later than 104 A. D., for the younger 
Pliny, in a letter written about that date, speaks of his re¬ 
cent death. 

Martial’s poems comprise fourteen books of epigrams, 
the last two books of which, consisting of lines intended 
to accompany xenia and apophoreta , gifts which it was 
customary to present to friends at the Saturnalia , were not 
published as books by their author. One book of Spec- 
tacula celebrates the theatrical performances and other 
shows in which the Romans delighted; the remaining 
books are Epigrammata , each book revised and published 
with an introduction by the author. The longest poem 
contains fifty-one lines, the shortest consists of one hex¬ 
ameter. Most of the poems are in elegiac verse, but many 
are in hendecasyllables, and a few other metres occur. 
Martial is the master of epigram. His verses are senten¬ 
tious and to the point, often bitter, not infrequently inde¬ 
cent, but never stilted, dull, or unnatural. In an age of 
many imitative poets, Martial was original. This does not 
mean that no traces of imitation are to be found in his 
poems, for his obligations to Catullus are evident and 
frankly acknowledged, while the influence of Virgil, Ovid, 
and Juvenal is plainly to be seen; but his pointed wit,his 
candor, and his sententious brevity are his own. He has 
no lofty poetic inspiration, and exhibits no greater height 
of character than what is needed to let him see and ac¬ 
knowledge his own limitations. In spite of the bitterness 
of many of his verses, he seems to have been a man of 
genial nature. He was a friend of Silius Italicus, Quintil¬ 
ian, the younger Pliny, and Juvenal, but does not mention 
Statius by name, though his sneers at epic poets are prob¬ 
ably directed against him. The younger Pliny says of 
him : “ He was a talented, acute, and spirited man, whose 
writings are full of wit and gall, and not less candor.” 1 


Pliny, Ep . Ill, xxi. 




MARTIAL 


203 


Martial is not to be ranked among great poets, but his 
ability to express well-defined thoughts in brief, senten¬ 
tious, pointed words, has made his epigrams the models 
for all later times. The following lines commemorate 
the death of Arria, who, when her husband Paetus was 
ordered to kill himself, showed him the way : 

The poniard, with her life-blood dyed, 

When Arria to her Psetus gave, 

“ ’Twere painless, my beloved,” she cried, 

“ If but my death thy life could save .” 1 * 

Another brief epigram is on some fishes, supposed to 
be the work of the great sculptor Phidias : 

These fishes Phidias wrought; with life by him 

They are endowed; add water and they swim . 3 

These lines also refer to a work of art: 

That lizard on the goblet makes thee start. 

Fear not; it lives only by Mentor’s art . 3 

The daily life of Rome is described in the following 
lines: 

Visits consume the first, the second hour; 

When comes the third, hoarse pleaders show their power; 

At four to business Rome herself betakes; 

At six she goes to sleep, by seven she wakes; 

By nine well breathed from exercise we rest, 

And in the banquet hall the couch is pressed. 

Now, when thy skill, greatest of cooks, has spread 

The ambrosial feast, let Martial’s rhymes be read, 

With mighty hand while Caesar holds the bowl, 

When drafts of nectar have relaxed his soul. 

Now trifles pass. My giddy Muse would fear 

Jove to approach in morning mood severe . 4 


1 I, xiii. These selections are translated by Goldwin Smith in 

Bay Leaves. 

3 III, xxxv. 


3 III, xli. 


4 IV, viih 



204 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


Among the many learned writers of this period the 
most important is the elder Pliny. Gaius Plinius Secun- 
dus was born at Novum Comum, in northern 
elder ^ ^aly, in 23 A. d. At an early age he went to 
Rome, where he came under the influence of 
Pomponius Secundus, whose example may have led him 
to combine public service with diligent study and author¬ 
ship. Pliny’s life was passed in the service of the state. 
He was an officer in the cavalry, serving in Germany and 
perhaps also in Syria; he was a trusted counsellor and 
agent of Vespasian, and held at different times the im¬ 
portant post of procurator or governor in several prov¬ 
inces. His nephew mentions especially his procuratorship 
in Spain. These various and important official duties 
did not, however, withdraw Pliny’s mind from his studies. 
When he was carried in the litter through the streets in 
the evening, after his official duties were performed, 
while he was bathing, and at his meals, he read or was 
read to constantly. He believed that no book was so poor 
as not to contain something worth recording, and there¬ 
fore he took notes of all he read. At his death he left 
one hundred and sixty rolls of manuscript notes, closely 
written on both sides. With all this reading Pliny was 
not a mere bookworm, hut a practical man of affairs and 
an interested observer of men and things about him. His 
zeal for knowledge cost him his life; for when the great 
eruption of Vesuvius took place, in 79 a. d., Pliny, who 
was in command of the fleet at Misenum, went in a war 
galley to the neighborhood of the volcano to investigate 
the strange phenomenon and to aid those in peril, landed, 
and finally succumbed to the ashes and noxious gases. 
The description of this event is the most interesting of 
the letters of his nephew, the younger Pliny. 

The result of Pliny’s diligence is seen in his great 
encyclopaedic work, the Natural History, in thirty-seven 
books. In this he undertakes to describe the whole realm 


PLINY THE ELDER 


205 


of nature in a systematic way. The first book consists 
of a table of contents with a list of the authors con- 
Th N t l su ^ e ^* Then follow in order the general 
History. mathematical and physical description of 
the universe, geography and ethnology, an¬ 
thropology, zoology, botany, and mineralogy. Under min¬ 
eralogy the uses of metals and stones are described, and 
this leads to a valuable history of painting and sculp¬ 
ture. The Natural History is written for the most part 
in a simple, straightforward style, though with occasional 
lapses from good taste, but it is not a great work of liter¬ 
ature. Its importance lies in the information it contains. 
In the first book, Pliny mentions nearly five hundred 
authors from whom his information is derived, but as he 
also speaks of one hundred chosen ones whose works he 
consulted, it is evident that his authorities fall into two 
classes. Apparently he really consulted about one hun¬ 
dred, but recorded in the first book the names of other 
writers to whom his real authorities referred. Pliny is 
almost the only ancient writer who tries to give much 
information about the sources of his knowledge, but it is 
often difficult, if not impossible, even in his case to be 
sure from what source a particular statement is derived. 
In general, it is clear that Pliny was a careful worker, 
and his statements can, as a rule, be accepted as true. 
The great work was ready for publication in 77 A. d. and 
was sent to Titus with an interesting preface. But even 
after this, Pliny continued to add the results of further 
reading or observation. His death came upon him in the 
midst of his work. Pliny was also the author of several 
other works, the most important of which were the 
History of the German Wars, in twenty 
works 8 ° tlier kooks, and a history From the End of the 
History of Aufidius Bassus , in thirty-one 
books. Just what period this work embraced is not cer¬ 
tain, but the suggestion that each book treated of one 


206 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


year and that the whole was a history of the years 41-71 
A. d. is not improbable. These works, as well as Pliny's 
lesser writings, are lost, but they served at least to supply 
material to Tacitus, who cites the German Wars, and 
to other historians. 

Of the technical writings of this period only two now 
exist: the Stratagems (Strategemata ) and the treatise on 
Frontinus. the Roman aqueducts ( De Aquis TJrbis Romce 
Various Libri II), by Sextius Julius Frontinus, a 

writers. man 0 f some distinction, who was praetor in 

70 A. d., consul several times, and was appointed Curator 
Aquarum, or overseer of the water supply of Rome, in 97 
A. D. His writings belong rather to the history of tech¬ 
nical studies than to that of literature. The names of 
several authors of memoirs of travels, legal treatises, 
speeches, histories, and technical writings of various 
kinds are known to us, but their works are lost or only 
partially preserved as unsatisfactory fragments. The 
schools of grammar and rhetoric continued to exist, and 
many teachers of these subjects enjoyed considerable rep¬ 
utation. The greatest among them, and the only one 
whose work has survived to modern times, is Quintilian, 
the last, and in some respects the greatest, of the Span¬ 
ish writers of Rome. 

Marcus Fabius Quintilianus was born at Calagurris, 
in Spain, about 35 A. d. He was educated at Rome under 
the most distinguished teachers of the time, and when his 
education was completed returned to his native place. But 
in 68 A. d., Galba, who had been governor in Spain before he 
Quintilian became emperor, called Quintilian to Rome. 

Here he became a teacher of rhetoric, and 
received a salary from the imperial treasury. At the 
same time he was a prominent barrister, but published 
only one speech, though others were published without 
his authority from shorthand reports. He was a man 
of great influence, and was even raised to the consul- 


QUINTILIAN 


207 


ship by Domitian, who had appointed him tutor of his 
grandnephews. After teaching for twenty years he gave 
up his school and devoted himself to the composition of 
his great work, the Institutio Oratoria. This was pub¬ 
lished about 93 A. D. An earlier work, On the Reasons for 
the Decay of Oratory (De Causis Corruptee Eloquentice ), 
is lost. Quintilian’s private life was not free from trouble. 
He married at an advanced age, but his wife died when 
only eighteen years old, his younger son soon after at the 
age of five, and his elder son after a brief interval at the 
age of nine. When Quintilian died is not known, but he 
can hardly have lived long after 100 a. d. 

The title Institutio Oratoria, given by Quintilian to 
his work, designates it as a text-hook of oratory. But it 
is no mere technical treatise on the art of 
Oratoria speaking. Quintilian was an enthusiastic 
lover of his profession, and believed that ora¬ 
tory was the highest expression of human thought and 
human life. Like Cato, he demanded that the orator he 
not merely a good speaker, but also, and first of all, a 
good man. He must also have a general literary educa¬ 
tion before proceeding to the technical study of oratory. 

Owing to this large conception of the qualities of the 
orator, Quintilian’s great work became a general and very 
important treatise on education. Its arrangement is as 
follows : the first book treats of the elements of education 
and contains many interesting observations upon family 
life; the fundamental principles of rhetoric are treated 
in the second book, which carries on the discussion of 
the purposes and methods of education; the next five 
books (III-VII) deal exhaustively with the matter of 
oratory under the main heads of invention and disposition 
or arrangement, and are for the most part strictly tech¬ 
nical; four books (VIII-XI) treat of expression and all 
that is included in the word style , with a discussion of 
memorizing and delivery; and the last book (XII), now 


208 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


that the theory of oratory is expounded, reverts to the 
orator himself, and discusses the moral qualities and the 
continuous self-discipline which alone can make the ora¬ 
tor great. 

The technical part of the Institutio Oratoria is now, 
since the study of formal rhetoric is no longer an impor¬ 
tant part of a liberal education, of little interest except 
to those who make a special study of Roman style and 
educational theories. Yet even in these books are many 
wise utterances of permanent value, such as “ the price 
of a laugh is too high when it is purchased at the expense 
of virtue or, “ a joke at the expense of the wretched is 
inhuman ”; 2 or, “ it is the spirit and the force of mind that 
make men eloquent.” 3 Such remarks, admirably ex¬ 
pressed and inserted in fitting places, make the more 
technical books of Quintilian’s work even now well worth 
reading. But the chief interest for the modern reader 
lies in those parts of the work which have less to do with 
the special training of the orator, and are more general in 
their scope—the discussion of elementary education in 
the first book, the treatise on the larger and broader edu¬ 
cation of mature life in the last book, and the brief crit¬ 
ical survey of Greek and Latin literature in the first chap¬ 
ter of the tenth book. 

The theory of education as presented by Quintilian is 
the result of serious thought. It shows a breadth of 
Th th. view, a reasonableness, and at the same time 

of education. a Iciness of conception that give its author 
at once an important position among educa¬ 
tional writers. The ethical or moral element in educa¬ 
tion is especially emphasized. Quintilian, like many 
others in his day, felt that the standard of morals, of lit¬ 
erature, and of oratory was lower than in the days of the 
republic. But instead of mourning over the decay of 


1 Inst. Orat.y vi, 3, 5. 


2 Ibid., vi, 3, 5. 


3 Ibid., vii, 7, 2. 



QUINTILIAN 


209 


Roman virtue and taste, Quintilian, seeing that the 
only cure lay in right education, undertook to show the 
way to a restoration of the ancient excellence. Tacitus, 
in his essay on oratory, mentions carelessness of parents 
and had education as the chief reason for the decay of 
eloquence; the same ground had apparently been taken 
by Quintilian himself in his lost essay on the Decay of 
Oratory , and in the Institutio Or at or ia the attempt is 
made to show how deterioration may he stopped and the 
old virtue restored. That others besides Quintilian were 
seriously interested in reform there is no doubt, and if 
their efforts met with little success, it is probably in part 
because they tried to restore the excellence of a time that 
was past and were unable to regulate the active forces of 
the present. 

As a literary critic Quintilian exhibits the same sanity 
that characterizes his educational theory. Since a knowl¬ 
edge of the best literature is necessary for the 
orator, Quintilian passes in review the chief 
Greek and Latin writers, and it is interesting 
to observe that he regards the latter as the equals of the 
Greeks. He has decided preferences, and gives to Cicero, 
whom he regards as the equal of Demosthenes, the fore¬ 
most place among the Romans. Yet he recognizes the 
merits even of those authors, such as* Seneca, whose style 
he least admires. In brief and admirably expressive 
words he characterizes the style of the chief writers of 
Greece and Rome, and his judgment has, in almost every 
case, remained the judgment of later ages. It is inter¬ 
esting also to note that the works of nearly all those 
writers whom he mentions as the best have been preserved 
to our own time, which is an additional proof that the 
extant works have been preserved for the most,part not 
by mere chance but on account of their intrinsic merit. 
Quintilian’s admiration for Cicero is evident in his own 
style. Statius had reverted to the style of Virgil, and 


Literary 

oritioism 


210 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


Quintilian goes back to Cicero, discarding the rhetorical 
excrescences of Seneca and his school. His Latin is clas¬ 
sical and beautiful, sometimes equal to that 
of Cicero himself. He is the foremost rep¬ 
resentative of the classical reaction of his time. But 
the reversion to an earlier style, whether in literature or 
art, has never been permanent, and Quintilian’s influence, 
great as it undoubtedly was, could not stop the course of 
that change and decay which was in the end destined to 
transform the Latin language and bring into being the 
Romance tongues of modern times. 


CHAPTER XV 


NERVA AND TRAJAN 


Nerva and 
Trajan. 


Nerva, 96-98 a. d. —Trajan, 98-117 a. d. —Tacitus, about 55 to 
about 118 a. d. —Juvenal, 55 (?) to about 135 a. d. —Pliny the younger, 
61 or 62 to 112 or 113 a. d. —Other writers. 

Under Nerva (96-98 a. d.) and Trajan (98-117 a. d.) 
freedom of speech and literary utterance, which had been 
banished under the tyranny of Domitian, were restored. 

Nerva and Trajan were educated men. Noth¬ 
ing remains of Nerva’s poems, which led 
Martial to call him “the Tibullus of our 
times,” and Trajan’s history of the Dacian War is 
also, unfortunately, lost. Trajan’s replies to the letters 
of the younger Pliny show that he could write in a clear, 
concise, and business-like manner, but exhibit no further 
literary qualities. He paid attention to the education of 
the young and founded the Ulpian library, but was not a 
man of marked literary tastes. Under Nerva and Trajan 
literature was allowed to take its own course without 
hindrance and also without that imperial patronage which 
sometimes stifles free utterance quite as effectually as 
severity or intimidation. Nevertheless there was little 
literary production of any importance. There were many 
writers, but most of them have left not even their names 
to posterity. The only authors of literary importance 
under these emperors are Tacitus, Juvenal, and the 
younger Pliny. 

Cornelius Tacitus 1 was born, according to such evi- 


1 The prcenomen is uncertain. The best manuscript (Mediceus I) 
gives it as Publius, later manuscripts and Sidonius Apollinaris as Gaius. 


211 



212 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


dence as exists, in 55 or 56 A. d. The place of his birth 
is not recorded, and nothing certain is known of his 
family; but his education, his career, and his 
Tacitus. marriage to the daughter of Agricola all com¬ 
bine to indicate that he belonged to a family of some im¬ 
portance. His marriage took place in 78 A. D., one year 
after the consulship of Agricola. Tacitus began his offi¬ 
cial career under Vespasian, continued it under Titus, and 
reached the rank of praetor under Domitian, in 88 A. D. 
Under Trajan, in 97 A. D., he was appointed consul suf- 
fectus , and about 112-116 A. d. he was proconsul of Asia. 
His death took place probably not long after 117 A. d. 
He had a great reputation as a public speaker, as is evi¬ 
dent from the fact that in 97 or 98 A. d. he delivered the 
funeral oration over Verginius Rufus, and it was probably 
due in great measure to his eloquence that in 100 A. d. he 
and Pliny accomplished the conviction of Marius Priscus, 
proconsul of Africa, for extortion. It was not without 
knowledge of public affairs that Tacitus turned to the 
writing of history, nor was it without practical knowledge 
of oratory that he wrote the dialogue De Oratoribus. 

The works of Tacitus in the order of composition are 
the Dialogue on Orators (Dialogus de Oratoribus), the 
dramatic date of which is 75 A. d., while the 
date of composition is uncertain; the Ger¬ 
mania, published in 98 A. d. ; the Agricola , 
written early in the reign of Trajan, probably 
in 98 A. d. ; the Histories, written under Trajan, and 
apparently not completed much before 110 A. D. ; and the 
Annals, published between 115 and 117 A. d. The Dia¬ 
logue on Orators is an inquiry into the causes of the de¬ 
cay of oratory. In form it is an imitation of Cicero’s 
famous dialogue De Oratore, and the style also imitates 
that of Cicero. In this respect the dialogue is so unlike 
the later works of Tacitus that his authorship has been 
denied by many scholars. It must, however, be remem- 


Works of 

Tacitus. 

The 

Dialogus. 


TACITUS 


213 


bered that this is his earliest work, and that the Ciceronian 
style was taught in the school of Quintilian and no doubt 
in other schools at Rome, so that an imitation of Cicero 
was a natural beginning for a young author. Moreover, 
there are in the dialogue traces of the later style of Taci¬ 
tus, which is distinguished for its epigrammatic utterances 
and its frequent use of innuendo. The work may therefore 
be unhesitatingly ascribed to Tacitus. It is an interesting 
and attractive dialogue, in which the quiet life of the poet 
is contrasted with the more active career of the orator 
before the real subject—the reasons for the decay of ora¬ 
tory—is discussed. The conclusion is reached that ora¬ 
tory has declined partly on account of the faulty rhetor¬ 
ical education in vogue, but still more because the orator 
no longer has under the imperial government the influ¬ 
ence and power that belonged to his predecessors in the 
days of the republic. 

The Agricola (De Vita et Moribus Iulii Agricolce) is 
a biography and panegyric of Gnaeus Julius Agricola, 
Tacitus’s father-in-law. In the introduction 
The Agncola. rp ac j^ ug gi ves hi s reasons for having written 
nothing during the reign of Domitian. The passage de¬ 
serves to be quoted, not only as a specimen of Tacitus’s 
style, but because it places in a clear light his view of the 
imperial government in the first century. Throughout 
the Histories and the Annals his attitude is the same, 
and his genius has imposed his view upon all later times. 
Under Domitian two eminent Stoics, Arulenus Rusticus 
and Herennius Priscus, had been put to death and their 
works publicly burned. Tacitus mentions this and then 
expresses himself as follows : 

They thought forsooth that in that fire the voice of the Roman 
people and the freedom of the senate and the conscience of the 
human race were being consumed, especially since the teachers of 
philosophy had been banished and every good profession driven 
into exile, that nothing honorable might offend them. We have 


214 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


indeed given a great proof of our patience; and just as the ancient 
time saw the utmost limit of liberty, so we have seen the utmost 
limit of servitude, when even the intercourse of speech and hear¬ 
ing was taken away by the inquisitions. And with our speech we 
should have lost even our very memory, if we had been as 
able to forget as to keep silent. Now at last our courage has re¬ 
turned, but although . . . Trajan is daily adding to the blessed¬ 
ness of the times, . . . and the state has gained confidence and 
strength, nevertheless by the nature of human weakness remedies 
are slower than diseases; and just as our bodies grow slowly, but 
are quickly destroyed, so you can oppress genius and learning more 
quickly than you can revive them. For the charm of sloth also 
comes over us, and the inactivity we hated at first grows dear at 
last. Throughout fifteen years, a great part of the life of man, 
many have fallen through chance mishaps, and all the most ener¬ 
getic ones by the cruelty of the emperor, and a few of us are 
left, so to speak, as survivors not only of the others, but even of 
ourselves, since there have been taken out of our lives so many 
years, in which we who were youths have passed to old age and 
as old men have almost reached the limit of life itself without a 
word. 1 

Agricola was not a great man either in intellect or in 
force of character. Moreover, he had lived through the 
reign of Domitian in safety by not opposing the will of 
the tyrant. Naturally it was hard to write a panegyric on 
such a man which should interest and please the public. 
But Tacitus, by laying the chief stress upon Agricola’s 
successful administration in Britain, which is prefaced by 
an account of the country and of the previous Roman ex¬ 
peditions thither, made of his panegyric a genuine bit of 
history with Agricola, the most prominent person in it. 
Thus the reader’s interest is kept alive and the writer’s 
purpose accomplished. The work closes with an eloquent 
and beautiful apostrophe to Agricola. 

When he wrote the Agricola , Tacitus was already plan¬ 
ning a great history of his own times, for which he had 


1 Agricola, 




TACITUS 


215 


at least begun to accumulate materials. In the Germania 
(Oe Origine Situ Moribus ac Populis Gennanice) the 
material collected to serve as introductory to 
Germania the account the wars * n Germany is pub¬ 
lished as a separate work. The little treatise 
is interesting as the earliest extant connected account of 
the country and inhabitants of northern Europe. A few 
of the statements contained in it are manifestly incor¬ 
rect, but for the most part, what Tacitus tells us agrees 
with and supplements what we know from other sources. 
The essay is a compilation from various earlier works, 
among which Pliny’s History of the German Wars was 
no doubt the most important, though Tacitus probably 
consulted the works of Caesar, Velleius Paterculus, and 
others, besides obtaining information from some of the 
many Romans who had served in the army in Germany. 
There is no indication that Tacitus was ever in Germany 
himself. As a literary production the Germania is far in¬ 
ferior to the Agricola , though written at about the same 
time. In the Agricola Tacitus expresses his own feel¬ 
ings for his father-in-law, whom he evidently loved and 
respected, while in the Germania there is little room for 
feeling of any sort, and none for emotion. Yet, with all 
the difference in literary merit, the two works show the 
style of Tacitus at the same stage. There are still some 
remnants of Ciceronian smoothness, but these are evi¬ 
dently survivals. The tendency to use concise, even abbre¬ 
viated phrases, to add point to expressions by verbal an¬ 
tithesis or by inversion of order, and to make his sentences 
imply more than the words actually express, is character¬ 
istic of Tacitus’s mature style and is evident, though not 
yet fully developed, in the Agricola and the Germania alike. 

At least as early as 98 A. d. Tacitus planned to write a 
history of his own times. His original purpose was to be¬ 
gin with the accession of Galba and continue in chrono¬ 
logical order. But after completing the history of the 
15 


216 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


period from Galba to the death of Domitian (68-96 A. d.) 
he went back to the death of Augustus, and wrote the 
history of the time to the accession of Galba 
history 8 * (14—68 a. d.). He intended to write the his¬ 
tory of the reigns of Xerva and Trajan, but 
never did so. The part of the work first completed, treat¬ 
ing of the events of the author’s own lifetime, is entitled 
Histories (Historic) ; the part written later, but treating of 
the earlier period, is usually called the Annals ( Annales ), 
though its proper title is Ab Excessu Divi Augusti , in imi¬ 
tation of the title of Livy’s history, At) TJrbe Condita. The 
two together consisted of thirty books, of which fourteen 
belong to the Histories and sixteen to the Annals. Of the 
Annals , the following parts are preserved: Books I-IV 
and the beginning of Book V, from the death of Au¬ 
gustus to the year 29 a. d., Book VI, with the exception 
of the beginning, carrying on the story to the death of 
Tiberius, and Books XI-XVI, from 47-66 A. D., though 
this long fragment is mutilated at the beginning and the 
end. The account of the reign of Caligula is lost, as is 
that of the first seven years of the reign of Claudius, and 
of somewhat more than two years at the end of the reign 
of Xero. Of the Histories only the first four books and 
part of the fifth remain, and this important fragment is 
preserved in only one manuscript. It contains the his¬ 
tory of little more than one year, the memorable year 
68-69 a. d., in which Galba, Otho, and Yitellius, in quick 
succession, gained the imperial power and lost their lives, 
to be followed by Vespasian. 

In the Annals , dealing with a period before his own 
recollection, Tacitus treats the history of Rome and the 

A 1 empire as if it were directed by the wishes, 
the whims, and caprices of a few individuals. 
He depicts the character of Tiberius and the court of 
Xero in vivid and lurid colors. The court intrigues, the 
judicial and private murders, the licentiousness and cor- 


TACITUS 


217 


ruption of the capital are spread before us with all the 
power of his brilliant and incisive style. These things 
appear as the most important matters in the history of 
the time. Modern scholars have, with the aid of inscrip¬ 
tions, found that the Roman empire was, throughout this 
period, ably and peaceably administered by permanent 
officials, and was little affected by the terror that reigned 
in the capital. But for Tacitus, Kome was the empire. 
The provinces were in the dim distance and had in his 
eyes little historical importance. That his view of history 
is narrow and distorted is clear; yet his genius has made 
it for centuries the only accepted view of Roman history 
under the early emperors. In the Histories , dealing with 
his own times, he sees things more clearly. The uprising 
of the Batavians under Civilis and the war in Palestine are 
treated with as much detail as the sanguinary struggles in 
Rome, though here also the influence of the characters 
and acts of individuals upon the irresistible course of 
history is overrated. This view of history, which makes 
events depend too much upon individuals, joined with a 
pessimism which sees hidden motives behind even inno¬ 
cent or indifferent acts, is the great defect of Tacitus 
as an historian. His information is carefully collected, 
though, as a rule, he neglects all mention of his authorities. 
In preparing his account of the Jews in the fifth book of 
the Histories he relied apparently upon hearsay and upon 
other untrustworthy sources of information, without re¬ 
ferring to the Septuagint or to Josephus, but similar care¬ 
lessness can not be proved in other parts of his work. 

His style is impregnated with the words and phrases 
of the classical writers, especially of Virgil, and with the 
rhetorical teaching of the Silver Age, and yet 
Style of it is thoroughly individual. It is concise, 
sharp, and cutting, but often grandly poetic 
in its eloquence; it is apparently straightforward, yet 
somehow often reveals a half-hidden meaning; it is care- 


218 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


Jully elaborated, yet it affects the reader with rugged 
earnestness. Such a style is almost inimitable, whether 
by writers of Latin or by translators. It has been compared 
to that of Carlyle, and the comparison is worth mention¬ 
ing, though it should not be pushed too far. Few proso 
works contain more epigrammatic sentences than those 
of Tacitus. Examples are : “ Traitors are hated, even by 
those whom they advance 1 ‘‘None grieve more osten¬ 
tatiously than those who are most delighted in their 
hearts ”; 2 “ Princes are mortal, the state eternal ”; 3 
“ When the state was most corrupt the laws were most 
numerous”; 4 5 “New men rather than new measures”; 6 
“Vices will exist as long as men”; 6 “Fame does not 
always err ; sometimes it chooses.” 7 Endowed, as he was, 
with striking stylistic ability, writing, in fact, in a style 
which could not fail to arouse the interest and hold the 
attention of his readers, it is no wonder that Tacitus suc¬ 
ceeded in imposing upon the world his views of history, 
which can be only partially corrected by the careful study 
and interpretation of fragmentary records. 

Juvenal can hardly be separated from Tacitus. Both 
depict the life of Rome in the same lurid light, and the 
Juvenal picture presented by each agrees with that of 
the other. Juvenal’s diatribes seem to illus¬ 
trate the statements of Tacitus, and Tacitus shows that 
Juvenal’s violence is justified by the facts. Of Juvenal’s 
life little is known. His full name is given in some manu¬ 
scripts as Decimus Iunius Iuvenalis. One vita or life 
gives the date of his birth as 55 A. d., which may be cor¬ 
rect, though there is no especial reason to regard it as ex¬ 
act. He was born at Aquinum, a town of the Volscians, 
where he held the offices of duumvir quinquennalis and 
of flamen Divi Vespasiani. He was also at one time a 
military tribune, serving with the first Dalmatian cohort, 

1 Annals, i, 58. 2 Ann., ii, 77. 3 Ann., iii, 6. 4 Ann., iii, 27. 

5 Hist., ii, 95. J Hist., iv, 74. 7 Agric 9. 



JUVENAL 


219 


perhaps in Britain. This military service probably be¬ 
longs to his youth, and the local offices to his later life. 
He evidently received a good education, and he appears to 
have practised oratory for some years. Martial, who men¬ 
tions him several times, speaks of him as eloquent, not as 
poetic or satirical. The lives agree in stating that he was 
banished, but not in regard to the time or place of his 
banishment. He came, to Borne about 90 a. d., was still 
there in 101 A. d., and probably spent part of some of the 
later years in the capital. At Borne he lived in the Su- 
bura, the plebeian quarter, but had access to the houses 
of rich nobles. His satires were written between 100 and 
127 A. d., and he died about 135 A. d. 

Juvenal is the harshest and most violent of the four 
great Boman satirists. Lucilius was outspoken and some¬ 
times bitter, but aimed to correct while he 
The Satires, ^b^g^ fhg follies of his time; Horace soon 
lost all bitterness and expressed good-humored raillery; 
Persius derived his themes from books and preached 
Stoic doctrines; but Juvenal attacks Boman society in 
fierce and biting verses, shrinking from no gruesome 
or indecent detail, showing no humor save of the grim¬ 
mest and harshest sort, and with no hope of correcting 
the evils he depicts. He has all the variety of phrase 
of the accomplished rhetorician, and his lines have a 
rolling grandeur almost Virgilian. He shows, indeed, 
the influence of Yirgil more than of any other previous 
writer, though traces of Homer, Herodotus, Plato, nearly 
all the Boman poets, and among Boman prose writers 
Cicero, Valerius Maximus, and Seneca are found in his 
satires. The violence of his satires is, however, not 
directed against his contemporaries. He seems to have 
in mind rather the Borne of Domitian than that of Tra¬ 
jan or Hadrian, under whose rule he wrote. The six¬ 
teen satires are divided into five books. Book I (Satires 
i-vi) was written not earlier than 100 a. d., and Book II 


220 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


(Satire vii) not before 116 a. d. These are the most 
powerful, most violent, and least agreeable books. Book 
III (Satires vii-ix) was written about 120, Book IV 
(Satires x-xii) about 125, and Book V (Satires xiii-xvi) 
in 127 a. d. In these three books there is less viru¬ 
lence, but also less power than in the first two. Old 
age brought with it a loss at once of fierceness and of 
strength. 

In the first satire, Juvenal gives his reasons for writ¬ 
ing as he does. He is tired of listening to endless epics, 
and the corruptions of the time are such that 
the Satires “ ^ difficult not to write satire/ 51 and 
“ indignation makes verse. 55 2 The evils to be 
attacked are enumerated in a series of rapidly sketched 
pictures, and the poet declares that “ all that men do, 
their hope, fear, wrath, pleasure, joys, and gaddings make 
up the medley of my book. 55 3 And in the following 
satires the faults of men, the dangers of the city, the 
court of Domitian, the pride of wealth, the crimes of 
women, the lack of honor paid to intellect, the worthless¬ 
ness of noble birth without virtue, unnatural lust, the 
shortsightedness of human wishes, the wrong of setting 
children a bad example, and other striking features of 
the life of Borne are vividly presented and ruthlessly 
attacked. One of the most interesting satires is the 
third, in which the dangers of the city are described. A 
man who is leaving Borne for a small country town gives 
reasons for his departure: 


What should I do at Rome ? I can not lie; 
I can not praise a book that’s bad and beg 
A copy of it; I am ignorant 
Of the motions of the stars; I neither will 
Nor can make promise of a father’s death. 4 


'Sat. i, 30. 


2 Sat. i, 79. 
*Sat. iii, 41 ff. 


*Sat. i, 86 f. 



JUVENAL 


221 


The dirty streets, the water dripping from the aque¬ 
duct, the risk from falling tiles or household vessels, the 
drunken brawls in the streets, the rich man escorted 
home by clients and slaves with flaming torches, the dan¬ 
ger from robbers—these and many other details of the 
ill regulated capital are set before us. This satire is 
imitated by Johnson in his London , which has rightly 
been called one of the finest modern imitations of an 
ancient poem, and the same author’s poem on The Vanity 
of Human Wishes is a less accurate, though not less 
admirable, imitation of Juvenal’s tenth satire. The clos¬ 
ing passage of the tenth satire, in which the poet tells 
what are the proper objects of prayer, is a lofty utterance 
of human wisdom. The most savage of all the satires is, 
on the other hand, the sixth, in which the crimes of 
women are held up to execration. 

It is not easy for the modern reader to enjoy Juvenal. 
His satires are full of allusions to unknown persons and 
things at Rome; they abound also in mythological refer¬ 
ences and literary reminiscences, and finally the savage 
tone of the earlier books is disagreeable. Yet the power 
of invective, the clearness and vividness of description, 
the variety of diction, and the beauty of versification 
have combined to make Juvenal a much read author. 
That he is also much quoted is due to the epigrammatic 
and pointed form of many of his phrases. Mens sana in 
corpore sano , 1 Rara avis , 2 Panem et circenses , 3 Hoc volo , 
sic iubeof Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? 5 are among the 
most familiar Latin quotations, and many other almost 
equally familiar expressions are derived from Juvenal. 
Some of these are distinguished for their significance 
quite as much as for their form. Such are, for instance: 
“ And for the sake of life give up life’s only end ” 6 and 


1 Sat. x, 356. 
4 Sat. vi, 223. 


3 Sat. vi, 165. 
6 Sat. vi, 347. 


3 Sat. x, 81. 

6 Sat. viii, 84. 



222 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


Pliny the 
younger. 

his letters 
from that 


“ The greatest reverence is due a child.” 1 It is not with¬ 
out reason that Juvenal has exerted great influence on 
human thought. 

Tacitus and Juvenal resemble each other in their 
originality and vigor of thought and expression, their 
severe judgment of men and manners, and 
their pessimism. The younger Pliny con¬ 
trasts with them in all these respects, and 
give us an idea of Roman life very different 
which we derive from them. Gaius Plinius 
Caecilius Secundus was the son of Lucius Caecilius Cilo, 
a wealthy nobleman of Comum, hut was adopted by will 
by his uncle, the elder Pliny. He therefore changed his 
name, which was originally Publius Caecilius Secundus, 
and took that of his uncle, retaining his original family 
name, Caecilius, only for legal and formal use. He was 
born in 61 or 62 A. d., for he was in his eighteenth year 
when the eruption of Vesuvius took place, August 24, 
79 A. D. Cilo had died when Pliny was young, and the 
boy had become the ward of Verginius Rufus, which fact 
did not, however, diminish the paternal interest of his 
uncle, with whom he was at the time of the eruption. 
Pliny began his career as an advocate in 80 or 81 A. r>. 
He held various offices, was military tribune, quaestor in 
89-90 A. d., tribune of the people in 90-91 A. D., praetor 
in 93 A. d., was one of the prefects in charge of the war 
treasury and also of the general treasury, became consul 
in 100 A. d., and succeeded Sextus Julius Frontinus in 
the college of augurs in 103 or 104 a. d. He was gov¬ 
ernor of Pontus and Bithynia either in 111-112 or 112- 
113 A. d., and died before 114 A. D., either in his province 
or soon after his return to Italy. His life was passed 
chiefly in the service of the government, and for the most 
part at Rome. He was married three times, but had no 


1 Sat. xiv, 47. 



PLINY THE YOUNGER 


223 


children. He was an orator of some importance, deliver¬ 
ing most of his speeches in inheritance cases, though he 
was employed five times in important criminal suits. He 
recited his speeches before delivering them in public, 
and after delivery he published them, sometimes with 
corrections. He was interested in poetry, and wrote 
poems of various kinds, but these, as well as his speeches, 
with the exception of his panegyric on Trajan, are lost. 

Pliny’s extant works consist of nine books of letters 
to various persons, written between 97 and 109 a. d., a 
panegyric on the Emperor Trajan, delivered 
letters* * n A * D * w ^ en Pliny was made consul, 

and seventy-two letters to Trajan, written 
between 98 and 106, and from September, 111, to Janu¬ 
ary, 113 A. d. Trajan’s replies to fifty-one of these letters 
are published, which exhibit his firm judgment and prac¬ 
tical common sense in striking contrast to Pliny’s inde¬ 
cision and lack of independence. Pliny’s other letters 
are more interesting. He describes the scenes in the 
Roman courts, the gatherings where the audience was 
bored by authors who recited their works, he gives 
detailed descriptions of his Laurentine 1 and Tuscan 2 
villas, in two letters 3 to Tacitus he gives an account of 
the eruption of Vesuvius, his uncle’s death, and his own 
feelings. Incidentally he throws much light upon the 
social and family life of the time. His own character is 
also clearly portrayed. What a young prig he must have 
been who refused his uncle’s invitation to accompany 
him to see, from a nearer point of view, the great erup¬ 
tion, preferring to spend his time over his books, and 
who even continued to make extracts when awakened by 
the terrible quaking of the earth—and this at seventeen 
years of age! His vanity is beautifully exhibited in 
another letter to Tacitus, 4 in which he tells a story to 
his own credit, and hopes that Tacitus will insert it in 


1 Ep., II, xvii. 2 Ibid., V, vi. 3 Ibid., YI, xvi, xx. *Ibid., VII, xxxiii. 



224 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


the Histories , and in still another, 1 where he says to the 
most original and inimitable of all Roman writers since 
the Augustan times, “ You, such is the similarity of our 
natures, always seemed to me most easy to imitate and 
most to be imitated. Wherefore I am the more pleased 
that, if there is any talk about literature, we are men¬ 
tioned together, that I occur at once to those who are 
speaking of you.” Other qualities appear no less clearly. 
Vain he was and fond of praise, but at the same time 
kind to his slaves, affectionate to his friends, gentle, and 
conscientious. He seldom speaks unkindly of any one; 
and when he utters a sharp criticism, he almost always 
avoids mentioning the name of the person criticized. 
The love of nature was fashionable at Rome, and Pliny 
may be only following the fashion when he writes of 
natural scenery, but it is quite as probable that he 
really felt its charms. He had a great admiration for 
Cicero, and it was doubtless owing, in part, at least, to 
this admiration that Pliny, like Cicero, published his 
letters. There is, however, a great difference between 
the two collections. Cicero’s letters were collected and 
published by others, whereas Pliny’s were from the begin¬ 
ning intended for publication and were published at 
various times by Pliny himself. They are therefore not 
unpremeditated utterances, but carefully prepared writ¬ 
ings for the perusal of the public. Nevertheless the 
epistolary style is well preserved, though not without 
some pedantic elegance, and the letters give us the same 
insight into Roman life under Trajan as do those of 
Cicero into the life of the last years of the republic. 

The Panegyric on Trajan was delivered as the official 
expression of thanks on the part of Pliny and his col¬ 
league Cornutus Tertullus for their elevation to the con¬ 
sulate. After the speech was delivered it was revised and 
enlarged. It is therefore in its extant form neither v. 


1 Ep., VII, xx. 



PLINY THE YOUNGER 


225 


speech nor an historical essay, but a mixture of the two. 
After an introduction, Trajan’s acts before his entrance 
The int0 Rome are recounted, then his entrance 

Panegyric. and his many political, munic¬ 

ipal, and financial measures for the good of 
the state. Trajan’s personal qualities are praised in the 
most fulsome manner and those of Domitian set forth in 
the most hateful light. Then comes an account of Trajan’s 
second and third consulships, his care for the provinces, 
and his judicial acts, with traits of his private life. The 
speech or treatise ends with the expression of thanks from 
Pliny and his colleague. The Panegyric is not an attrac¬ 
tive production, but it is the chief source of information 
concerning the history of the earlier years of Trajan’s rule. 

Though not a great man nor a great writer, Pliny 
was a cultivated gentleman and a useful citizen. His 
Other letters make us acquainted with Roman life 

writers. from a side that Tacitus and Juvenal leave 
practically untouched. They are therefore 
not only interesting, but, as historical documents, of great 
importance. Besides Tacitus, Juvenal, and Pliny, there 
are no writers of the time of Trajan who deserve more 
than passing mention. The names of numerous poets 
are preserved, chiefly in Pliny’s letters, but their works 
are lost, and we have no reason to believe that they 
merited preservation. Orators, jurists, and grammarians 
continued speaking and writing, and some among them 
attained eminence, but their works are lost for the most 
part, and the technical treatises on grammar which are 
preserved possess little interest for the student of litera¬ 
ture. The same remark applies to the treatises on sur¬ 
veying and on the fortification of camps by Hyginus, on 
geometry by Balbus, and on surveying by Siculus Flaccus. 
The literature of the period between the death of Domi¬ 
tian and the accession of Hadrian is contained in the 
works of Tacitus, Juvenal, and Pliny. 


CHAPTEE XVI 


THE EMPERORS AFTER TRAJAN—SUETONIUS—OTHER 
WRITERS 


Hadrian, 117-138 a. d. —Antoninus Pius, 138-161 a. d. — Marcus 
Aurelius, 161-180 a. d. —Comraodus, 180-192 a. d. —Septimius Sev- 
erus, 193-211 a. d. —Alexander Severus, 222-235 a. d. —Gordian I, 
238 a. d. —Gallienus, 260-268 a. d. —Aurelian, 270-275 a. d. —Tacitus, 
275 a. d.— Suetonius, about 70 or 75 to about 150 a. d. —Florus, time 
of Hadrian—Justin, time of Hadrian (?)—Licinianus, time of An¬ 
toninus Pius—Ampelius, time of Antoninus Pius (?)—Salvius Juli- 
anus, time of Hadrian—Sextus Pomponius, time of Antoninus Pius— 
Gaius, about 110-180 a. d. —Quintus Cervidius Scaevola, time of 
Antoninus and M. Aurelius—Papinianus, time of Commodus and 
Septimius Severus—Terentius Scaurus, time of Hadrian—Terenti- 
anus Maurus and Juba, before 200 a. d.— Aero, about 200 a. d.— 
Porphyrio, about 200 a. d.— Festus, early in the third century. 


It was not until the fourth century after Christ that a 
new capital of the Eoman empire was founded at Con- 
Latin stantinople; but long before that time the 

literature rea j centre of gravity of the empire was shift- 
after Trajan. j n g toward the east. In Asia, Egypt, and 
Africa, were the great sources of wealth and the great 
masses of population. While Eome was growing from 
the position of a small Italian town to that of the ruler 
of the world, and even for some time after the establish¬ 
ment of the empire, the Komans had possessed a strong 
national feeling, and Eoman literature, although it began 
with imitation of the works of the Greeks, had been a 
national literature. But with the second century a 
change, which had been in preparation since the days of 
Augustus, became apparent. Eome was no longer the 
226 


LITERATURE AFTER TRAJAN 


227 


centre of the world in all things, though still the seat of 
government. Men of distinction spent at least a great 
part of their time in the smaller towns of Italy, and 
the leaders of thought and creators of literature no 
longer found it necessary to take up their residence at 
Rome. Then, too, the progress of Christianity brought 
with it a new literature which was not national, but 
Christian. These causes, with others less obvious, but 
perhaps no less potent, led to the rapid decay of the 
national literature. It is our task from this point to 
trace the progress of this decay, and at the same time to 
record the rise of Christian literature in the Latin 
language. VVorks of great literary importance are few in 
this period, and the history of literature can be treated in 
less detail than heretofore. 

The Emperor Hadrian (117-138 A. d.) was a man 
of singular versatility. He delivered and published 
Hadrian speeches and wrote an autobiography, works 
on grammar, and even poems. He was 
equally familiar with Greek and Latin, and it is probably 
in part due to this fact that the literary revival during his 
rule was less Latin than Greek. He spent a great part of 
his time away from Rome, and wherever he went his 
path was marked by the erection of buildings for use 
and ornament. He lived for three years at Athens, where 
he added a new quarter to the ancient city. Greek, 
which had for centuries been familiar to the literary men 
of Rome, became now, more than ever before, the literary 
language of the empire. It is hardly to be wondered at 
that Latin literature has under Hadrian no greater 
representative than Suetonius. 

Hadrian’s successor, Antoninus Pius (138-161 A. d.), 
was no writer, but showed his interest in literary and 
intellectual matters by granting salaries and privileges 
to philosophers and rhetors. Marcus Aurelius (161-180 
A. d.) was carefully instructed by Greek and Roman teach- 


228 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


The Anto 
nines. 


ers. While still a mere boy he was greatly interested in 
the Stoic philosophy; but the famous orator and teacher 
Fronto (see page 235) obtained such great in¬ 
fluence over him, that for a number of years 
he devoted himself to rhetoric. The cor¬ 
respondence of Fronto with Marcus Aurelius shows how 
great was the affection that existed between teacher 
and pupil, and also how petty were the rhetorical teach¬ 
ings and investigations in which Fronto passed his life 
and to which he hoped his pupil would devote his intel¬ 
lect. Fronto was, however, doomed to disappointment, 
for when Marcus Aurelius was in his twenty-fifth year 
he turned again to philosophy. The correspondence 
with Fronto is conducted in Latin similar to Fronto’s 
own, plentifully adorned with obsolete expressions taken 
from writers of the republican period. The Thoughts of 
Marcus Aurelius, those ethical maxims and moral reflec¬ 
tions which make the Stoic doctrines seem so much like 
Christianity, are written in Greek. That Marcus Aurelius 
regarded Greek as the proper language of culture, or at 
least of philosophy, is shown by the fact that he estab¬ 
lished the schools of philosophy at Athens with regularly 
salaried professors. Lucius Verus, the colleague of Mar¬ 
cus Aurelius until 169 a. d., was also a pupil of Fronto, 
and in his letters to his teacher shows the same faults of 
style exhibited by Marcus Aurelius. He had no influence 
upon Latin literature, and Commodus (180-192 A. d.) had 
no interest in literature of any sort. 

Pertinax had literary tastes, but his brief reign gave 
him no opportunity to influence the course of the national 
literature, while his successor Didius Juli- 
anus, who bought the empire from the prae¬ 
torian guards, found after sixty-six days of 
nominal power that his purchase brought him ruin and 
death. Septimius Severus (193-211 a. d.), although his 
native tongue was probably Punic, was well educated in 


Later 

emperors 


SUETONIUS 


229 


Greek and Latin and wrote an autobiography, but there is 
no indication that he exercised any marked influence 
upon Eoman literature. Among the later emperors were 
few whose literary interests were strong, and still fewer 
who appear as authors. In the third century Alexander 
Severus (222-235 A. d.) was seriously interested in Greek 
and Latin literature and encouraged literary production 
by all the means in his power ; Gordian I (238 A. d.) wrote 
a metrical history of the Antonines in thirty books, besides 
various other works in prose and verse, but these are lost, 
and his brief reign did not enable him to give imperial en¬ 
couragement to literature; the poems and speeches of 
Gallienus (260-268 A. d.) and the historical writings of 
Aurelian (270-275 A. d.) were of little importance. The 
Emperor Tacitus (275 a. d.) exerted himself to spread 
abroad the works of his ancestor the historian, and it may 
be due to him that those works are in part preserved. 
Those among the still later emperors who had literary 
interests made their influence felt rather upon Greek than 
Latin literature. 

The most important writer in the reign of Hadrian is 
Gaius Suetonius Tranquillus. He was born apparently 
between 70 and 75 A. d. He was a friend of 
the younger Pliny, who mentions him in his 
letters. Pliny obtained for him a military tribuneship, 
which he passed on to a relative. Pliny also assisted him 
in the purchase of a small estate and encouraged him to 
publish some of his writings. Under Hadrian he held a 
position as secretary, from which he was dismissed in 121 
A. d. Of his later life nothing is known, but he probably 
devoted himself to his literary labors, and as his works 
were numerous, we may assume that he lived to an ad¬ 
vanced age. 

Only two works of Suetonius are preserved, the first 
entire, but for a small part at the beginning, and of the 
second only a part, and that much mutilated. The 


230 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


Lives of the Twelve Caesars (De Vita Ccesarum ), in eight 
books, contains the lives of Jalius Caesar (Book I), Au¬ 
gustus (Book II), Tiberius (Book III), Ca- 
The Lives Of Ugula (Book IV ), Claudius (Book V), Nero 
t e aesars. ^ Book yj^ Q aB)a? otho, Vitellius (Book VII), 

Vespasian, Titus, and Domitian (Book VIII). The work is 
dedicated to Septicius Clarus, to whom Pliny the younger 
dedicated his letters, and was published between 119 and 
121 a. d., for Clarus is addressed as prcefectus prcetorio , an 
office which he held only during those years. The begin¬ 
ning is lost, for the life of Caesar begins at the point when 
Caesar was sixteen years old. Suetonius is a careful and 
conscientious writer and makes use of various sources of 
information, not only published histories and biographies, 
but also public documents, autograph letters of the em¬ 
perors, and apparently oral tradition. He lacks, however, 
the critical insight necessary for a good historian and the 
understanding of character needed by a good biographer. 
He collected his material with impartiality, avoiding 
neither what was friendly nor what was hostile to the em¬ 
perors whose lives he records, and arranged this material 
as best he could, with no apparent endeavor to trace the 
development of character, or even to determine in all 
cases the chronological sequence of events. Dates are 
seldom given, and the work as a whole presents rather the 
material for history than real history. But this material 
is interesting, and the style is simple, straightforward, and 
clear. Although he wrote at a time when affectations of 
style were fashionable, Suetonius had the good taste to 
keep himself free from them. 

The second work of Suetonius, entitled De Viris Illus - 
tribus ( On Illustrious Men), was a series of 
Ill™tribus biographies of Latin poets, orators, historians, 

philosophers, grammarians, and rhetoricians. 
The section on orators began with Cicero, that on histo¬ 
rians with Sallust. The greater part of the section on 


OTHER PROSE WRITERS 


231 


grammarians and rhetoricians is extant, as are the lives of 
Terence, Horace, and Lucan from the section on poets, 
and that of Pliny the elder from the section on historians. 
Extracts from other parts of the work are preserved by 
Jerome and in the scholia on various writers. Each sec¬ 
tion contained a list of the authors discussed, a brief 
account of their branch of literature, and short lives of 
the authors arranged chronologically. In this work also 
the style is simple and clear, but brevity is sought at the 
expense of literary excellence. 

Other works by Suetonius, some of which were much 
used by later writers as sources of information, were on 
Greek Games, Roman Games, the Roman 
Other works. y ear ^ optical Marks in Books, Cicero’s Re¬ 
public , Dress, Imprecations, and Roman Laws and Customs. 
Some of these were doubtless included in a work entitled 
Prata , a sort of encyclopaedia in ten hooks, which dealt 
also with philology and natural science. The works on 
Greek Games and on Imprecations were apparently written 
in Greek, the rest in Latin. Suetonius was not a great 
writer, but was a diligent compiler of interesting informa¬ 
tion. His extant works are valuable as sources of in¬ 
formation rather than as literary productions, though 
their freedom from the affectations of the age entitles 
their author to some praise even from a literary point of 
view. 

To the time of Hadrian belongs a brief history of 
Rome by Annius or AnnaBus Floras. This is not a mere 
epitome of Livy, as it is entitled in one of the 
Florus ‘ manuscripts, but rather a panegyric on the 

Roman people. > Floras personifies the Roman people, 
speaks of its childhood under the rule of the kings, its 
youth while Rome was conquering Italy, its manhood 
from the conquest of Italy to the time of Augustus, and 
then instead of going on to tell of its old age, he says the 
emperor restored it to youth. Florus writes in a flowery, 


232 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


rhetorical style, and pays little attention to any part of 
history except wars and battles. For these reasons, and 
also because of its brevity, the work was a popular text¬ 
book in the Middle Ages. This Floras is probably iden¬ 
tical with a poet who is reported to have joked with 
Hadrian, and who has left two rather attractive specimens 
of verse, one of five lines on spring, the other of twenty- 
six lines on the quality of life. A fragment of a discus¬ 
sion of the question whether Virgil was greater as a poet 
or as an orator is also preserved under the name of Florus. 
If this Florus is still the same person, we learn from the 
fragment that he was unsuccessful in competing for a 
prize in poetry at Rome, traveled about in many parts of 
the empire, and finally settled as a teacher in a provincial 
town, probably Tarraco (Tarragona), in the northeast part 
of Spain. 

Historical writing was at a low ebb. Suetonius is far 
the most important historian of the second century, and 
he is made important rather by the dearth 
of good historians than by his own merits. 
Florus hardly deserves the name of historian. 
Justin’s epitome of Trogus (see page 164) 
belongs, perhaps, to the time of Hadrian, and 
is important because it has preserved much of the sub¬ 
stance of the work of Trogus, but is in no sense an 
original history. Under Antoninus Pius a history of 
Rome was written by Granius Licinianus, but the extant 
fragments show that this was little more than an epitome 
of Livy. The Liber Memorialise by Lucius Ampelius, 
written at about the same time, is a little handbook of 
useful knowledge, containing general information about 
the earth, the stars, and the winds, followed by a brief 
sketch of the history of various nations. It is a mere com¬ 
pilation, possessing neither historical nor literary value. 

The study of law was, on the other hand, pursued by 
many jurists of ability, whose works were much used by 


Other 
historical 
writings of 
the second 
oentury. 


OTHER PROSE WRITERS 


233 


those who gave to Roman law its final form in the reign 
of Justinian. Under Hadrian the edicts of the praetors 
Jurists an ^ °^ er ma gi s trates were collected and 

codified by Salvius Julianus, a distinguished 
jurist of African birth, who attained the position of 
prwfectus urU and was twice consul. The Edictum Per- 
petuum , as his work is called, became henceforth the 
basis of Roman law. Julianus was also the author of in¬ 
dependent juristic works. Sextus Pomponius, a younger 
contemporary of Julianus, wrote among other things a 
brief history of Roman jurisprudence, which is incorpo¬ 
rated in the digests. Among the many jurists of the reign 
of Antoninus Pius, the most important is Gaius (about 110- 
180 A. d.), whose introduction to the study of law ( Insti - 
tutiones), clearly written in good and simple language, is 
for the most part preserved in the digests, and served as 
the foundation of the similar work written at the com¬ 
mand of Justinian. The works of Quintus Cervidius Scae- 
vola, who lived under Antoninus Pius and Marcus Aurelius, 
were also much used by the writers of the pandects. One of 
the most distinguished jurists under Commodus and Sep- 
timius Severus was Papinianus, who was put to death 
under Caracalla (212 A. D.) because he was faithful to that 
emperor’s brother Geta. 

The study of grammar was diligently pursued in the 
second century, and with it went the writing of commen- 
„ taries on the classical authors. Under Ha- 

Grrammar, 

literature, drian, Terentius Scaurus wrote a Latin gram- 
and mar, part of which is preserved in an abbre- 

philosophy. viated fornl) 

as well as commentaries on 
Plautus, Virgil, and Horace, fragments of which are 
found in the works of later commentators. Under the 
Antonines, rhetoricians and grammarians were numerous, 
and discussions of literary and grammatical questions 
formed a considerable part of polite conversation. Metrical 
handbooks were written by Terentianus Maurus and 


234 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


Juba, Helvius Aero wrote commentaries on Terence, 
Horace, and Persius about the end of the second century, 
and Pomponius Porphyrio, a grammarian of distinction, 
whose scholia on Horace still exist, though not in their 
original form, wrote probably at the end of the second or 
the beginning of the third century. Festus, who made 
an epitome of Verrius Flaccus (see page 166) probably 
lived but little after this time. Some of the rhetoricians 
of this period probably continued to teach as they had 
themselves been taught, but the most important among 
them developed a new school, which will form the subject 
of our next chapter. Philosophy had in the second cen¬ 
tury still many followers, but there was little literary pro¬ 
duction in Latin. Dio Chrysostom, Plutarch, Marcus 
Aurelius, and Sextus Empiricus wrote in Greek. 


CHAPTER XVII 

LITERARY INNOVATIONS 


Fronto, about 100 to about 175 a. d.— Gellius, born about 125 
a. d. —Apuleius, about 125 to about 200 a. d.— Innovations in poetry 
—The Pervigilium Veneris. 

An important figure in the literature of the second 
century was Marcus Cornelius Fronto, of Cirta, in Nu- 
midia. He was born about 100 a. d., studied under the best 
teachers, and was distinguished as an orator and teacher 
Fronto even un( ^ er Hadrian, though his greatest influ¬ 

ence was exerted under the Antonines. He 
became a member of the senate under Hadrian, and his 
speech against the Christians may have been delivered be¬ 
fore that body. In 143 A. D. he was consul, and was to 
have been proconsul entrusted with the government of 
Asia, but relinquished that office on account of ill health. 
He was the teacher of Marcus Antoninus and Lucius Verus, 
both of whom were much attached to him, and as was 
natural under such circumstances, he was greatly honored 
and became very wealthy. Of his family life we know 
only that he was married, that his daughter Gratia mar¬ 
ried Gaius Aufidius Victorinus, and that five daughters 
were removed by death. The date of his death is un¬ 
known, but it was probably shortly after 175 A. d. Parts 
of Fronto’s correspondence were discovered in 1815, and 
from his letters we get an idea of his style and his teach¬ 
ing. The correspondence is with Marcus Aurelius, Lucius 
Verus, Antoninus Pius, and others, and several essays are 
included, which were probably sent with the letters to 

235 


236 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


Fronto’s correspondents. One of these essays, the Prin- 
cipia Historice , compares the Parthian campaigns of Verus 
and Trajan to the advantage of Verus. This essay was in¬ 
tended to serve as an introduction to a history of the deeds 
of Verus in the Parthian War, but the history was never 
written. What gives Fronto’s letters their chief interest is 
his teaching in regard to oratory and style. He considers 
rhetoric the noblest possible study, and warns Marcus 
Aurelius against surrendering to the charms of philoso¬ 
phy, but the chief end of the study of rhetoric is to acquire 
new and striking words and phrases. Fronto apparently 
despaired of acquiring new ideas or new points of view, 
and he saw that Latin literature could not go on for¬ 
ever merely imitating the writers of the Golden Age, or 
even those of the Silver Age. He was too much of a 
scholar to think of drawing from the living spring of 
common every-day speech, and therefore hit upon the ex¬ 
pedient of reverting to the early writers, such as Ennius, 
Plautus, Accius, Cato, Sallust, and Gracchus. His language 
is therefore full of old-fashioned expressions used without 
the simplicity that belongs to the early times. That such 
a writer as Fronto was highly respected and exerted a 
powerful influence upon his contemporaries is a sign of 
the depth to which Roman literature had sunk. 

A much younger man than Fronto, but like him, a man 
of books and an admirer of archaic phraseology, was Aulus 
Gellius, who was born probably about 125 
a. d., studied under various masters at Rome 
and at Athens, and held some judicial posi¬ 
tion at Rome. His extant work, entitled Nodes Atticce 
(Attic Nights ), received its title from the fact that it 
contains the results of the writer’s labors begun at Athens, 
when he used to read various authors and make extracts 
from them in the night. These extracts, with a variety 
of notes and comments, are arranged in twenty books, all 
of which are preserved except the eighth, of which we 


GELLIUS 


237 


have only the table of contents, and the end of the twen¬ 
tieth. The subjects treated are language and literature, 
law, philosophy, and natural history. Gellius quotes no 
contemporary authors, but introduces them as speakers, 
for parts of his work have the form of dialogues. There 
is no order in the arrangement of subjects, but things 
are put down as Gellius happened to find them in the 
works he read. No critical faculty is exhibited, nor has 
Gellius any marked literary skill. He is simply a diligent 
compiler, whose work is interesting and valuable to us 
merely because it preserves fragments of earlier works 
now lost and information about a variety of subjects. 

The Latin of the Golden Age was a more or less artifi¬ 
cial language developed by the genius of the great writers 
from the common language of every-day life. 
Latin^ 68 ** The Latin of the Silver Age was a develop¬ 
ment from the literary Latin of the Golden 
Age, not directly from the popular speech. While liter¬ 
ary Latin was thus passing through various phases, the 
popular speech was also developing along its own lines, 
and by the second century after Christ was very different 
from the literary Latin of the time as well as from any 
Latin, whether spoken or written, of the Ciceronian or 
earlier times. It had already entered upon the course of 
change which was in the end to lead to the birth of the 
Romance languages. Fronto, in his desire to infuse new 
life into the worn-out literary Latin of his day, went back 
to the writers before Cicero and adopted their words and 
phrases, at the same time exerting himself to arrange 
words in unusual order with the intention of giving 
piquancy to his expression. His precepts and example 
were followed by others, as, for instance, Gellius, and still 
more clearly, Marcus Aurelius and Lucius Yerus as they 
appear in their letters to their teacher. But Fronto, al¬ 
though he had great influence for a time, could not turn 
the stream of progress backward. If literary Latin was to 


238 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


develop anything new, it must be by adopting something 
from the living speech of the people. This course was 
followed, in a measure, at least, by Apuleius. 

Apuleius (the prcenomen Lucius is doubtful) was, like 
Fronto, an African, though he may have been of Roman 
descent. He was born probably about 125 
Apuleius. A d. ? at Madaura, on the borders of Numidia 
and Gaetulia. He was educated at Madaura, Carthage, 
and Athens, travelled extensively, and was for a time in 
Rome, where he was employed as an advocate. He mar¬ 
ried iEmilia Pudentilla, a wealthy widow of Oea, in Africa, 
and was accused by her relatives of having led her into 
the marriage by means of magic arts. His defense against 
this charge is the extant book Be Magia (On Magic), also 
called the Apologia. In its present form the book is a 
revised and enlarged edition of the speech in court. Apu¬ 
leius was evidently acquitted, and he became a man of 
great influence and reputation. He prided himself on his 
versatility, wrote and spoke both Greek and Latin, and 
confined himself to no one branch of literature, but was 
orator, poet, scientist, philosopher, and novelist, without, 
however, displaying any great originality in any direction. 
He preferred to call himself a Platonic philosopher, but 
his chief activity was that of a travelling orator, or sophist, 
who went from place to place giving public exhibitions of 
his skill in composing and delivering interesting speeches 
on all sorts of subjects. He seems to have spent most of 
his life in Africa, and he held the office of priest of the 
province (sacerdos provincm) at Carthage. He was initi¬ 
ated into the mysteries of Isis and seems to have been 
one of those who sought in the mystic worship of foreign 
deities the satisfaction of their religious yearnings which 
the Roman state religion did not give. He seems to 
have been opposed to Christianity, though he nowhere 
mentions it directly. His great reputation and the 
number of works ascribed to him would seem to indi- 


APULEIUS 


239 


Works of 
Apuleius. 


cate that he lived to a good age, hut the date of his 
death is unknown. 

The extant works of Apuleius are the Metamorphoses , a 
novel in eleven books, the Apologia , a book on spirits, espe¬ 
cially the familiar spirit of Socrates, De Deo So- 
cratis , two books on the doctrines of Plato, 
De Dogmate Platonis , and a collection of ex¬ 
tracts from his speeches entitled Florida. The dialogue 
Asclepius , the treatise On the World (De Mundo ), and the 
treatise published as the third book on Plato’s teachings, 
are not by Apuleius. Of these works the most interesting 
is the novel entitled Metamorphoses , in which are narrated 
the adventures of a certain Lucius of Corinth, who was 
changed by magic into an ass, and in that form passed 
through many vicissitudes and saw and heard many 
strange things, until he was finally restored to human form 
by the aid of the goddess Isis, to whose service he afterwards 
devoted himself. This story is derived from a Greek 
original which appears in abbreviated form among the 
writings falsely ascribed to Lucian, under the title Lucius 
or The Ass. Apuleius amplified his Greek original by in¬ 
serting nearly twenty stories that have no connection 
with the plot. These are usually introduced in an un¬ 
skillful way, interrupting the narrative and destroying 
the unity of the work, but they are in themselves the 
most interesting parts of the whole novel. The longest 
and most famous among them is the charming story of 
Cupid and Psyche, beautifully rendered by William Morris 
in his Earthly Paradise. This mystic love tale was derived, 
like the other tales inserted in the story of Lucius, from 
a Greek original. It is not an invention of Apuleius, but 
he inserted it in his novel, and thus preserved it to later 
times. 

The style of Apuleius is not the same in his different 
works. Everywhere, to be sure, he aims at striking effect 
by means of unusual words arranged in peculiar order, 


240 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


and of sentences curiously broken up into short rhyth¬ 
mical members, very different in effect from the dignified, 
sonorous periods of Cicero and other clas- 
The style of s j ca i wr j^ ers# But j n the Metamorphoses he 
adopts many expressions from the common 
speech of the people, whereas in his oratorical and philo¬ 
sophical works he reverts, like Fronto, to the early 
writers. Apuleius and Fronto, both Africans, are the 
chief representatives of the elocutio novella , the new 
rhetoric, which broke with the continuous tradition of 
classical Latin and tried to infuse new life into Latin lit¬ 
erature. Neither Fronto nor Apuleius was a man of 
great inventive genius. Both imitated the Greek sophists 
of their time, such as Maximus of Tyre and ^Elius Aristi¬ 
des, not only in the subject matter of their discourses, but 
to some extent in their style; yet the fact that they 
wrote and spoke in Latin and tried to influence the course 
of Latin literature gives them an importance not pos¬ 
sessed by any of the later Greek sophists except Dio 
Chrysostom and Lucian. Apuleius was apparently more 
gifted by nature than Fronto, and his works show a sur¬ 
prising ability in the use of language, which makes up in 
a measure for the lack of originality in thought. Of his 
extant works the Metamorphoses is the most important. 
It not only shows the qualities of the elocutio novella 
more completely than any other work, but it gives a 
picture of the life of the times, with its superstitions, 
loose morals, robberies, friendships, hospitalities, and 
social amenities. Moreover, it has preserved to us many 
interesting tales, among them the story of Cupid and 
Psyche. Owing probably to the supernatural elements 
in the Metamorphoses and to the fact that he had 
been accused of magical arts, Apuleius came soon after 
his death to be regarded as a mighty sorcerer, and as 
a sorcerer he was associated with Virgil in mediaeval 
times. 


PERVIGILIUM VENERIS 


241 


While Fronto, Apuleius, and others were practising the 
elocutio novella in prose, attempts were made to introduce 
innovations in poetry. Terentianus Maurus, 
in poetry 0nS w * 10 wro ^ e verse a handbook on letters, 
syllables, and metres toward the end of the 
second century, mentions poetce novelli , and Diomedes, a 
grammarian of the latter part of the fourth century, 
speaks of poetce neoterici, to whom he ascribes a variety of 
innovations. The names of several of these poets are 
mentioned, but too little is known of them to awaken any 
interest in their personalities. Their innovations seem to 
have consisted largely of verbal juggling, a remarkable 
example of which is seen in these lines: 

Nereides freta sic verrentes caerula tranant , 
Flamine confidens ut Notus Icarium. 

Icarium Notus ut confidens fiamine , tranant 
Caerula verrentes sic freta Nereides . 

Here lines three and four are lines one and two read 
backward. Other examples are less elaborate, but show 
the same spirit, the same foolish playing with words. 
From such things as this no new life could be infused 
into poetry, and most of the verses preserved to us from 
the second and even the third centuries after Christ are 
little more than feeble echoes of the distant music of 
Virgil. Nevertheless there are already indications of 
the new mediaeval spirit, which was not to find its full 
development until the days of the minnesinger and 
the troubadours. Whether the Pervigilium Veneris 
The (. Night-watch of Venus) belongs to the second 

Pervigilium century or the third is not certain. At any 
Veneris. ra te it is the most striking early example of 
the romantic sentiment peculiar to mediaeval and modern 
times. The poem is written for the spring festival of 
Venus Genetrix, whose worship was revived and encour¬ 
aged by Hadrian. It is therefore probable that it belongs 


242 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


to the second century. It consists of ninety-three tro¬ 
chaic septenarii (the rhythm of Tennyson’s Locksley 
Hall ), a verse freely used by the early Latin poets, but 
hardly to be found in the first century after Christ. At 
irregular intervals the refrain : 

Cras amet qui nunquam amavit , quique amavit eras 
amet ,* 

is repeated. In the beginning of the poem, 

Ver novum ; ver iam canorum ; vere natus est Iovis; 
Vere concordant amoves; vere nubunt alites , 1 2 3 

may well have suggested to Tennyson the lines: 

In the Spring a fuller crimson comes upon the robin’s breast; 

In the Spring the wanton lapwing gets himself another crest; 
In the Spring a livelier iris changes on the burnish’d dove; 

In the Spring a young man’s fancy lightly turns to thoughts 
of love. 

At the end of the poem the lines: 

Ilia cantat , nos tacemus. Quando ver venit meum ? 
Quando fiam ut chelidon et tacere desinam? 

Perdidi Musam tacendo nec me Apollo respicit , 3 

sound like the wail of the old literature, which no spring 
was to awaken to new song. Indeed, the Pervigilium 
Veneris is almost as much mediaeval as classical. Its 
quantitative rhythm coincides with the natural accent of 


1 To-morrow he shall love who ne’er has loved, and he who has 

loved to-morrow shall love. 

2 It is new spring; spring already harmonious; in spring Jove 

was born. 

In the spring loves join together; in the spring the birds wed. 

8 She (the swallow) is singing, we are silent. When will my spring 
comef 

When shall I become like the swallow and cease to be silent ¥ 

I have lost the Muse by keeping silent, and Apollo cares not 
for me. 



PERVIGILIUM VENERIS 


243 


the words, it is full of assonances that suggest both allit¬ 
eration and rhyme, its spirit is almost modern in its senti¬ 
ment ; and even in its grammatical structure, especially 
in the use of the preposition de , it points forward to the 
great changes to come. 

In prose and verse alike, the second century after 
Christ was a period of innovations. The new methods of 
Fronto and Apuleius did not hold their own for any 
great length of time, hut they serve as symptoms of the 
decay of Latin speech, and may even have hastened that 
decay by turning men away from the continued imitation 
of the classic writers. The history of classical Roman 
literature may be said to end with Suetonius. But some¬ 
thing of the old spirit survived even into the period of 
the Middle Ages and affected strongly the literature of 
the Christian church. For this reason it is well to give a 
brief sketch of early Christian literature in Latin, and of 
the surviving remnants of pagan literary activity in the 
third and fourth centuries. 


CHAPTEK XVIII 

EARLY CHRISTIAN .WRITERS 


Minucius Felix, about 160 a. d. —Tertullian, about 160 to about 
230 a. d.— St. Cyprian, about 200-258 a. d.— Commodianus 249 a. d.— 
Arnobius, about 290 a. d. —Lactantius, about 300 a. d. 

The Christians are mentioned by Tacitus, the younger 
Pliny, and Suetonius, but in such a way as to show that 
The begin- their religion was misunderstood and their 
ning of Chris- growing importance little appreciated. But 
tian litera- as time went on, Christianity and the Chris- 
ture m Latin. ^ ang k ecame more and more important. 

Various means were tried to suppress them, for their 
belief and their practises were opposed to the state 
religion and seemed inimical to the state itself. Yet the 
new religion continued to gain in the number and influ¬ 
ence of its converts, and in the second century Christian 
writings begin to appear in Latin. The new religion had 
been founded in the eastern part of the empire, and its 
first literary productions were in Greek, a language which 
continued for many years to be the chief medium of 
expression for Christian thought. No sketch of the 
development of Christianity, even in the western part of 
the empire, could be given without more than a mere 
mention of the early Greek Christian writings; but the 
development of Christianity is a subject quite outside of 
the scope of this book, which is concerned with Christian 
literature only in so far as it was written in Latin. Nor 
is it possible in a book of this kind to do more than men¬ 
tion briefly the chief Christian writers and their works, 
244 


MINUCIUS FELIX 


245 


leaving all discussion of their doctrines to the historians 
of the church. 

The first Christian writer of Latin is Marcus Minucius 
Felix, of whose life nothing is known except that he was 
Minucius a ^ arr ^ s ^ er ( causidicus) at Rome, that he was 

Felix. a pagan in early life, and that he became a 

Christian. His only extant work is a defense 
of Christianity entitled Octavius , which was written 
probably not far from 160 a. d. The introduction tells 
how Minucius, with his two friends Octavius and 
Caecilius, was walking by the seashore at Ostia. Caecilius 
saluted a statue of Serapis which they happened to pass, 
whereupon Octavius rebuked Minucius for letting his 
friend remain in ignorance of the true religion. They 
continue their walk, but Caecilius can not let the rebuke 
of Octavius pass. At last the three friends sit down, 
Caecilius undertakes the defense of the old religion, 
Octavius that of the new, and Minucius is to be judge of 
their arguments. Caecilius argues that it is absurd for 
persons of little education, such as are most Christians, 
to think that they can settle questions which have 
puzzled the wisest philosophers. The Roman religion 
should therefore be retained, especially as the power of 
the gods has often been shown. An attack upon the 
lives and ceremonies of the Christians follows, which is 
interesting as a proof of the ignorance that prevailed in 
pagan circles. Caecilius then attacks the Christian belief 
in a future life, and ends with a recommendation of 
skepticism. His speech is vigorous and even vehement, 
showing marked rhetorical training. Octavius in his 
reply takes up the various points raised by Caecilius and 
replies to them in order. He lays the chief stress upon 
the unity of God and the absurdities of pagan polytheism 
and philosophy. There is no argument based upon the 
crucifixion or the resurrection of Christ, no argument 
that is strictly Christian. There is no appeal to faith or 


246 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


to love, but only to reason, and the arguments are not 
drawn from the Bible, but from the works of pagan 
philosophers, especially Cicero’s De Natura Deorum and 
Seneca’s writings, or from the experiences of human life. 
When Octavius has finished, Caecilius declares that he is 
convinced and the friends separate. 

The Octavius is different from other early writings in 
defense of Christianity, inasmuch as it bases no argument 
upon the Bible and makes no appeal to the emotions. 
These peculiarities are most easily explained by the theory 
that Minucius wrote his treatise as a reply to a speech of 
Fronto against Christianity, that he put the substance of 
Fronto’s speech into the mouth of Caecilius, and then, in 
the person of Octavius, refuted it point for point. In 
style Minucius attains at times an almost classic elegance 
and simplicity, though he shows the influence of the rhe¬ 
torical schools of the Silver Age and is sometimes need¬ 
lessly emphatic. He continues the tradition of the clas¬ 
sical school, with no trace of the affectations or innovations 
of Fronto or Apuleius. Apart from its interest as the ear¬ 
liest specimen of Christian writing in Latin, the Octavius 
deserves to be read as the most attractive Latin prose 
after the time of Trajan. 

Minucius Felix is known to us by only one short work, 
in which he displays conservative literary taste, cultivated 
imagination, and ability to conduct an argument calmly 
and dispassionately. Tertullian, a much more important 
figure than Minucius in the history of the church, is 
Tertullian known by a great body of writings, in which 
the qualities he shows are almost the opposite 
of those we admire in Minucius. Yet Tertullian is an 
interesting and powerful figure in the history of literature 
as well as in that of the church. Quintus Septimius 
Florens Tertullianus was born at Carthage, probably about 
160 a. d., and may have died about 230 A. D. At any rate, 
the period of his chief activity was in the reigns of Septim- 


TERTULLIAN 


247 


ius Severus and Caracalla. In early life he was a pagan, 
but was converted to Christianity, possibly through his 
wife, who was a Christian. He attained the position of 
presbyter in the church. In middle life he became a 
Montanist—that is, a follower of Montanus, an enthusiast 
of Ardaba, in Mysia, who declared himself the Comforter 
promised by Christ, claimed prophetic powers, declared 
that the end of the world was at hand, and promulgated 
a variety of strict doctrines and rules for conduct. The 
writings of Tertullian are from beginning to end contro¬ 
versial. Some of them are in defense of Christianity 
against the heathen, while others are directed against 
those Christian beliefs and practises which he does not 
approve. To the second class belong the writings in sup¬ 
port of Montanism, for Tertullian was of such a passionate 
nature that an argument in support of any doctrine neces¬ 
sarily becomes an attack upon those who hold any other 
views. As the chief advocate of Montanism in the west, 
Tertullian softened some of its more obviously absurd 
doctrines, but could not modify them so far as to make 
them acceptable to the church at large. He was there¬ 
fore in constant opposition to the church during the 
latter part of his life, and at a later time his writings 
came to be regarded as heretical. Nevertheless, his works 
were much read, and his Apologeticus was even translated 
into Greek. 

Tertullian exercised the greatest influence upon the 
Latin of the church, for up to his time most speculative 
Christian writing had been in Greek, and he was therefore 
obliged to invent or adapt the suitable means for the ex¬ 
pression of those thoughts and ideas which were unknown 
to the pagan writers. He is justly regarded 
Tertullian as ^he f° un der western, as opposed to 
eastern or Greek, theology. His style is 
harsh, inelegant, and sometimes obscure, but vigorous and 
animated. His eloquence is that of intense earnestness 
17 


248 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


rather than of careful training. His vocabulary is not 
strictly classic, but contains expressions taken from the 
popular speech and from Greek, as well as others which 
he seems to have formed for himself. He has been called 
the Cicero of the church, but whatever the greatness of 
his eloquence, it has little resemblance in quality to that 
of Cicero. Only in a few orations does Cicero approach 
the enthusiastic earnestness of Tertullian, and the pol¬ 
ished beauty of Cicero’s periods is utterly lacking to Ter- 
tullian’s rugged utterance. His style has more resem¬ 
blance in detail to that of his fellow-African Apuleius, but 
shows no evidence of conscious imitation. He uses short 
sentences, as a rule, and even his long sentences have no 
periodic structure; he strives for effect by means of un¬ 
natural expressions; he delights in antitheses, plays on 
words, and even rhymes. His Latin is hard to read, but 
his originality of thought and his passionate earnestness 
of purpose compensate fully for his defects of style. With 
Minucius Felix Christian writing in Italy appears as an 
attempt to express Christian thoughts, or at least to de¬ 
fend the Christian religion, with all the elegance of 
classical Latinity. Tertullian writes with vigor and en¬ 
thusiasm, hampered by no classical traditions. The rela¬ 
tive importance of the Italian and African schools may he 
judged in a measure by the difference in extent between 
the brief treatise of Minucius and Tertullian’s voluminous 
writings. For nearly two centuries the style of Tertullian 
predominates, being only gradually assimilated to the 
classical norm, until St. Augustine fixes the Latin of the 
church by forming a style in which the African elements 
are subordinate. 

The beginning of this change is seen even in the wri¬ 
tings of Tertullian’s admirer, St. Cyprian. Thascius Cae- 
cilius Cyprianus was born of pagan parents about 200 a. d. 
The place of his birth is unknown, but we are informed 
that he was an African. He received a good education 


CYPRIAN 


249 


and became a teacher of rhetoric. After his conversion 
he became a presbyter, and in 248 or 249 a. d. was chosen 
Cyprian. bishop of Carthage, not without opposition. 

From January 21, 250 a. d., until the begin¬ 
ning of March in the following year, he lived in conceal¬ 
ment to escape the persecution of the Christians under 
Decius. His avoidance of martyrdom at this time was se¬ 
verely criticized, but he defended it on the ground that 
his life was necessary to the welfare of the church. In 
257 A. d. a new persecution was instituted by the Emperor 
Valerian, and Cyprian was banished to Curubis, but after¬ 
wards recalled to Carthage and confined to his gardens. 
When ordered to appear before the proconsul at Utica he 
fled, but returned to his gardens when the proconsul came 
to Carthage. He was arrested September 13,258 A. d., and 
on the following day was tried, condemned, and executed. 
Cyprian’s writings comprise thirteen treatises and eighty- 
one letters, among which are several letters manifestly by 
other authors. Some of the treatises or tracts are ad¬ 
dressed to individuals, and some of the letters are to all 
intents and purposes tracts, so that the division into two 
classes is not easy to carry out consistently. His writings 
are partly in defense of Christianity against paganism, 
partly for the encouragement of the Christians in perse¬ 
cution, and partly on various points of church discipline. 
His letters are especially valuable for the light they throw 
upon church history. His doctrines are orthodox, and his 
writings were therefore not open to the objections urged 
against those of Tertullian. He was, however, an ardent 
admirer of Tertullian, and shows the constant influence 
of his teachings. His style is easier and simpler than 
Tertullian’s, always clear, and often attractive. Although 
he lacks Tertullian’s originality, he excels him in ability 
to express his thoughts so as to appeal to the reader. 

The earliest Christian poet is Commodianus. Of his 
life little is known, and the statement that he was born 


250 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


at Gaza, in Syria, is based upon a somewhat doubtful 
interpretation of the title of one of his poems. 1 In 
early life he was a pagan, but was converted, 
Commodi- and became a bishop. His works consist of 
a long poem in defense of Christianity ( Car¬ 
men Apologeticum) and a collection of eighty short 
poems called Instructions {Instructiones per Litteras Ver- 
suum Primas) so composed that the initial letters of the 
lines spell the titles of the poems. The Carmen Apologet¬ 
icum. contains references which fix its date in 249 A. D. 
The poems are remarkable for the earnestness of their 
Christian feeling and still more for their metrical peculi¬ 
arities. The hexameters are divided into halves, and at 
the end of each half the rules for quantity are observed, 
while in the rest of the verse those rules are disregarded. 
The lines are not merely faulty hexameters, but a new and 
original combination of quantitative verse and prose. In 
the Carmen Apologeticum the lines are arranged in pairs, 
so that each pair forms a distich. The most remarkable 
part of the Carmen Apologeticum is the fantastic descrip¬ 
tion of the end of the world with which the poem closes. 
The bistructiones are divided into two books, the first 
warning the heathen and the Jews to lay aside their 
errors, the second containing advice for the various classes 
of Christians. In spite of the dryness of his style Com¬ 
modi anus is interesting as the earliest Christian poet, and 
the student of language finds in his poems many words and 
constructions taken from the common speech of the people. 

Much less interest attaches to the seven books Adver- 
sus Nationes (Against the Gentiles ) by Arnobius, who 
wrote under Diocletian (284-305 a. d.). Jerome says 
that Arnobius was a distinguished rhetor at Sicca in 


*The poem is the last of the Instructiones. The title reads: 
Nomen Gasei and the initial letters of the lines read from the last 
to the first from the words : Commodianus mendicus Christi. From 
this it is inferred that Commodian was Gasceus , i. e., from Gaza. 



COMMODIANUS 


251 


Africa, who opposed Christianity for a long time. When 
he became converted the bishop demanded a proof of his 
Arnobius f^th, whereupon he wrote a work against the 
heathen and was received into the church. 
Whether this report is accurate or not, a work is extant 
under the name of Arnobius, entitled Adversus Nationes , 
which shows by its style that the author had been trained 
in the practise of rhetoric. The first two books defend the 
Christians against the accusations of their enemies, especial¬ 
ly the charge that the misfortunes of the world were due 
to the progress of Christianity and the neglect of the old 
gods. The five remaining books proceed to show the ab¬ 
surdities of polytheism and the foolishness of the pagan 
forms of worship. Arnobius has little knowledge of the 
Christian religion and little originality of thought. The 
only doctrine peculiar to him is his theory that the soul is 
not immortal by nature, but may become immortal through 
the grace of God. His style is disfigured by its excessive 
vehemence and artificial rhetoric, which shows, however, 
that the author was carefully educated. This appears also 
in his discussion of pagan philosophy and religion, and in¬ 
deed the chief interest attaching to the books Adversus Na¬ 
tiones is their testimony to the manner in which an educated 
pagan employed his education in the service of Christianity. 

Lactantius (Lucius Csecilius Firmianus Lactantius) 
was a pupil of Arnobius, according to Jerome’s statement, 
and was called by Diocletian with the gram- 
Laotantius. mar j an Flavius to teach Latin rhetoric at 
Nicomedia, in Bithynia, a Greek city in which teachers of 
Latin found few patrons. Lactantius was therefore poor 
and had leisure for writing. When he was converted to 
Christianity is not known, but it can not have been before 
he reached middle life. In his old age he was called by 
the Emperor Constantine to be the tutor of his son Cris- 
pus. Nothing remains of writings by Lactantius before 
his conversion, but his later works, both prose and verse, 


252 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


are numerous. The most important are the seven books 
entitled Institutiones Divines {Divine Institutions , an 
exhaustive philosophical work in support of Christianity 
against paganism), after which should be mentioned the 
treatises De Opificio Dei {On the Work of God, a discus¬ 
sion of creation and the nature of man), De Ira Dei {On 
the Wrath of God , dealing with the current theories of 
Providence), a fanatical work on the deaths of the persecu¬ 
tors from Nero to Galerius ( De Mortihus Persecutorum ), and 
a curious poem On the Phoenix. The treatise De Opificio 
Dei is Christian only in its general tendency, and con¬ 
tains no direct reference to Christianity. This is prob¬ 
ably because it was written at the time of the persecution 
under Diocletian (303 A. D.). The poem On the Phoenix 
(that fabulous bird that builds a nest, burns itself up, re¬ 
appears among the ashes as a worm, grows to an egg, is 
hatched, and flies away to renewed life) shows many 
traces of Christianity but contains no direct reference to 
the new religion. Lactantius was well educated in the 
learning of the pagans, and when he became a Christian 
did not forget what he had learned before. His style is 
purer than that of his Christian predecessors, being 
modelled upon that of Cicero. For this reason the name 
“ Christian Cicero ” has been applied more appropriately 
to him than to Tertullian, though in power of eloquence 
Tertullian, with all his harshness of style, is the greater. 

The second century, which saw the birth of Christian 
literature in Latin, produced, as we have seen, several 
writers of real power, and as the third century opened, 
Christian literature gained, in the person of Lactantius, a 
writer who possessed at the same time elegance of style. 
With Lactantius the African school of Christian writing 
approaches the classical style of Minucius Felix, and the 
path is made straight for the writings of St. Jerome and St. 
Augustine. From this time on, the real life of Latin litera¬ 
ture is seen in Christian rather than in pagan writings. 


CHAPTER XIX 

PAGAN [LITERATURE OF THE THIRD CENTURY 

Terentianus, about 200 a. d.— QuintusSerenusSammonicus, about 
200 a. d. —Nemesianus, 283 a. d —Reposianus, toward 300 a. d. —Yespa, 
late in the third century—Hosidius Geta, early in the third century— 
Disticha Catonis—Marius Maximus, about 165-230 a. d. —JElius Julius 
Cordus, about 250 a. d. —The Historia Augusta —Domitius Ulpianus, 
killed 228 a. d. —Julius Paulus, first half of third century—Cornelius 
Labeo—Quintus Gargilius Martialis—Censorinus, 238 a. d. —Gaius 
Julius Solinus—Gaius Julius Romanus, early third century—Marius 
Plotius Sacerdos, latter part of third century—Aquila Romanus— 
jElius Festus Aphthonius, end of third century—The panegyrists: 
Eumenius, Nazarius, Mamertinus, Drepanius. 

While Christian literature was developing in the 
third century the pagan literature dragged on its senile 
Pagan poetry existence. There was little poetry that de- 
of the third served the name, though skill in versification 
oentury. wa s no t uncommon. Terentianus wrote in 
verse his handbook of metres about the beginning of 
the century, and not far from the same time Quintus 
Serenus Sammonicus composed a medical handbook con¬ 
taining sixty-three recipes in 1,107 hexameters. He does 
not pretend to be a physician, but derives his wisdom, 
such as it is, from Pliny and other writers. The recipes 
are of various kinds, some recommending the use of 
herbs in a simple and sensible way, while others pre¬ 
scribe more or less disgusting compounds of animal mat¬ 
ter, and a few are nothing more nor less than magic 
charms. So fevers are to be cured by wearing tied to 
one’s neck a bone found within the enclosure of a house, 

253 


254 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


and a cure for another fever is found in a piece of paper 
inscribed in the proper manner with the magic formula 
abracadabra , which is to be worn round the neck of the 
patient. To the credit of Sammonicus it should be said 
that his knowledge of metre is greater than his knowl¬ 
edge of medicine; but even that does not raise his hand¬ 
book to the level of poetry. A writer of much better 
quality, who even deserves to be called a poet, is Marcus 
Aurelius Olympius Nemesianus, who wrote, in the year 
283 A. d., a poem On Hunting (Cynegetica ), 325 lines of 
which are preserved, and who is also the author of four 
eclogues formerly attributed to Calpurnius (see page 188). 
The discussion of dogs, horses, hunting-nets, and the like 
in the Cynegetica can hardly be called poetry, but the 
eclogues, though written in close imitation of Calpurnius, 
who was himself an imitator of Virgil, show some genu¬ 
ine poetic spirit. There is also some poetic beauty in the 
poem on the love of Mars and Venus, by Reposianus, writ¬ 
ten toward the end of the third century, but not so much 
can be said in praise of Vespa’s metrical argument between 
a baker and a cook ( Indicium Cod et Pistoris ludice 
Vulcano) as to the relative merits of their callings, or of 
the epigrams and “echo verses” of Pentadius. These 
last consist of elegiac distichs so written that the first 
words of the hexameter are repeated or “ echoed ” at the 
end of the pentameter. Such verse has little relation to 
poetry, but shows that there was still an interest felt in the 
technique of metrical writing. That the study of the classic 
writers, especially of Virgil, was diligently cultivated, is 
shown by the existence of poems composed entirely of Vir- 
gilian lines and fragments of lines. A remarkable extant 
specimen of such work is the short tragedy Medea , prob¬ 
ably written by Hosidius Geta, near the beginning of the 
third century. Several anonymous poems add little to 
our admiration for the poets of the third century, but the 
so-called Disticha Catonis should be mentioned because 


PAGAN PROSE IN THE THIRD CENTURY 255 


they gained great and long-continued popularity. They 
are maxims of every-day wisdom expressed in distichs of 
two hexameters. Such maxims are : “ Regard it as the 
first virtue to hold your tongue; he is nearest God who 
knows how to keep a wise silence ”; or, “ Be sure to tell 
many of another’s kindness, but keep silence about the 
kindnesses you have done to others.” These distichs 
were soon imitated, and similar maxims in one line—mono- 
stichs—were also written. They are hardly poetry, hut 
have some interest because of their popular nature. 

The prose of the third century possesses even less in¬ 
terest than the verse. The only historians worthy of the 
Pagan prose name—Dio Cassius and Herodian—wrote in 
in the third Greek. Marius Maximus (about 165-230 
century. A> continued Suetonius’s lives of the 
emperors from Nerva to Heliogabalus, and about the 
middle of the century HHius Julius Cordus wrote lives of 
the more obscure emperors. These works are lost, but, 
like those of several other writers of this period, were 
used by the authors of the so-called Historia Augusta , a 
collection of lives of the emperors from Hadrian to Nu- 
merianus (117-284 A. d.). These lives were written by six 
authors, four of whom, iElius Spartianus, Julius Capi- 
tolinus, Yulcacius Gallicanus, and Trebellius Pollio, wrote 
under Diocletian (284-305 A. d.), while the remaining two, 
H£lius Lampridius and Flavius Vopiscus, belong to the 
early part of the fourth century. They are all alike in 
the poverty of their style and their liking for petty per¬ 
sonal details. The books on the Prcetorian Edict by 
Domitius Ulpianus, who was killed in 228 A. d., and by 
his younger contemporary, Julius Paulus, as well as other 
juristic works of the third century, were important con¬ 
tributions to the development of Roman law, and the at¬ 
tempt made by Cornelius Labeo in his lost work on the 
Roman religion to explain the pagan cult would probably, 
if it were preserved, be interesting as an attempt to de- 


256 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


fend the old religion against skepticism and Christianity. 
The extant parts of the work of Quintus Gargilius Mar- 
tialis on agriculture, veterinary medicine, the use of heal¬ 
ing herbs, and the like, show that the whole was a com¬ 
pilation from the works of Pliny the elder and other 
writers by a man who had sense and judgment; the 
treatise On Birthdays (De Die Natali ), written in a lively 
and easy style by a grammarian Censorinus in 238 a. d., is 
a compilation from Suetonius, Varro, and others, of in¬ 
formation concerning the birth and life of a man, astrol¬ 
ogy, music, and some other matters ; and the Collection of 
Things Worth Remembering (Collectanea Rerum Memora- 
bilium ), by Gaius Julius Solinus, contains valuable infor¬ 
mation about early Roman history (to Augustus) and the 
geography of the ancient world, with especial attention to 
oddities and peculiarities, whether of the countries or their 
inhabitants; but none of these works is of independent 
literary importance. The grammatical writings of Gaius 
Julius Romanus, who lived in the first years of the third 
century, were much used by Charisius somewhat more 
than a century later. A grammar (Ars Grammatica) in 
three hooks by Marius Plotius Sacerdos, written in the 
latter part of the century, is extant, as is also a brief 
rhetorical treatise by Aquila Romanus. The four hooks 
On Metres by JElius Festus Aphthonius, written under 
Diocletian, are lost, hut their contents are in part pre¬ 
served by Marius Yictorinus. These grammatical works 
are of importance chiefly for their references to earlier 
literature. 

None of the prose works just mentioned exhibits any 
creative talent or testifies to any new literary develop¬ 
ment. The only new literary phenomenon of the period 
is the rise of a school of oratory in Gaul, which produced, 
to be sure, nothing of great importance, but which shows 
by its very existence how far removed from Rome were 
now the centres of intellectual life, when the great Chris- 


THE PANEGYRISTS 


257 


The 

panegyrists. 


tian writers were Africans and the pagan orators were 
Gauls. The Gallic orators avoided the harshness and ob¬ 
scurity of the African school, and wrote in smooth Cicero¬ 
nian Latin, with a plentiful flow of words and a poor sup¬ 
ply of ideas. A collection of twelve panegyrics has been 
preserved, the first of which is Pliny’s address 
in honor of Trajan, delivered in 100 a. d., 
while the remaining eleven are dated at dif¬ 
ferent times from 291 to 389 A. D. One of these was deliv¬ 
ered in 297 A. d. by Eumenius, a teacher of Greek descent, 
but Gallic birth, for the benefit of the schools in his 
native town of Augustodunum (Autun), and three (per¬ 
haps four) of the others are probably by the same author. 
Three of the remaining speeches are assigned to known 
authors and dates. They are by Nazarius, in honor of 
Constantine (321 A. d.) ; by Mamertinus, in honor of Julian 
(362 A. d.) ; and by Latinus Drepanius Pacatus, in honor 
of Theodosius (389 A. d.). Two of these orators belong to 
the second half of the fourth century, but their speeches 
resemble the others in the collection, all of which are 
full of most exaggerated praise of the emperors. These 
speeches contain many references to the history of the 
times, but must be used with great care by the historian, 
since their purpose is to praise the emperors, and not even 
historical facts must be allowed to cast a shadow upon the 
imperial glory. The Gallic school of oratory was evident¬ 
ly flourishing in the later years of the third century and 
the greater part at least of the fourth. It was a learned 
school, based upon imitation of the ancient classics, and 
standing in no close relation to the living language of the 
times. The extant speeches show how thoroughly the 
study of the classics was carried on in Gaul, and at the 
same time how ready the orators were to flatter emperors 
who were pleased to listen to their obsequious praise. 

Now that the chief centres of Latin literature are found 
to be in Gaul and Africa, not in Pome or even Italy, the 


258 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


history of Roman literature has apparently reached its 
end; and yet throughout the fourth century, yes, even into 
the sixth century, the stream of old Roman tradition can 
be traced, and in the poems of Ausonius and Claudian and 
the De Consolatione PhilosojoMce of Boethius classical litera¬ 
ture still survives. It is hard to fix a date for the begin¬ 
ning of the Middle Ages, and even harder to assign a 
definite time for the end of classical Roman literature. 
The first great independent and original Christian writings 
in Latin—those of Tertullian—may be regarded as the be¬ 
ginning of mediaeval literature; but classical Latinity was 
by no means yet dead. In fact, in the fourth century, after 
Constantine had recognized Christianity as a state religion 
on an equal footing with the ancient belief, there was a 
revival of literature. Christian writers wrote in the an¬ 
cient Roman manner, and secular writings by Christians 
are not to be distinguished from those of the adherents of 
the old religion. The religious writings of the leaders of 
Christian thought—St. Hilary, bishop of Poitiers, St. Am¬ 
brose, bishop of Milan, St. Jerome and St. Augustine— 
belong to the history of the church rather than to that of 
Roman literature, and can be mentioned here only in 
passing, while the writings of many lesser lights of the 
church must be altogether neglected. There still remain, 
however, many works in which something of the old Ro¬ 
man literary spirit survives, even after Rome herself has 
ceased to be the seat of empire. 


CHAPTER XX 

THE FOURTH AND FIFTH CENTURIES 


Nonius, early in the fourth century—Macrobius, 410 (?) a. d. — 
Martianus Capella, about 400 a. d.— Firmicus Maternus, 354 (?) a. d.— 
Marius Victorinus, about 350 a. d. —iElius Donatus, about 350 a. d. 
—Charisius, about 350 a. d. —Diomedes, about 350 a. d. —Priscian, 
about 500 a. d. —Servius, latter part of the fourth century—Itinera¬ 
ries— Notitia, 354 a. d. —Peutinger Tablet—Palladius, about 350 a. d. 
—Vegetius, about 400 a. d. —Aurelius Victor, 360 a. d. —Eutropius, 
365 a. d. —Festus, 369 a. d. —Julius Obsequens, about 360 a. d. —St. 
Jerome, 331-420 a. d.— Ammianus Marcellinus, about 330-400 A. d.— 
Sulpicius Severus, early in the fifth century—Orosius, 417 a. d. — 
Gregorianus, about 300 a. d. —Hermogenianus, about 330 a. d. — Codex 
Theodosianus, 438 a. d. —The Code of Justinian, 529 a. d. —The Pan¬ 
dects and Institutes , 533 a. d. —Symmachus, about 345-405 a. d.— 
Dictys (L. Septimius), second half of the fourth century—Dares, fifth 
century—Hilarius, about 315 to 367 a. d. —Ambrose, about 340-397 
a. d. —Jerome, 331-420 a. d. —A ugustine, 354-430 a. d. —Optatianus, 
early in the fourth century—Juvencus, early in the fourth century— 
Avienus, 370 a. d. —The Querolus , about 370 a. d. —Ausonius, about 
310 to about 395 a. d. —Prudentius 348 to about 410 a. d. —Claudian, 
400 a. d. —Namatianus, 416 a. d.— Avianus, about 400 a.d. —Sedulius, 
about 450 a. d. —Dracontius, end of the fifth century. 

The prose writings of the fourth century are, with the 
exception of theological treatises, almost all mere compi¬ 
lations or abbreviations of earlier works. In the early 
years of the century Xonius Marcellus, a Peripatetic phi¬ 
losopher of Thubursicum, in Xumidia, wrote for his son 
a work in twenty books, De Compendiosa Doctrina , in 
which he discusses many questions pertaining for the most 
part to early Latin literature. This work is modelled on 
the Nodes Atticce of Gellius, to which it is vastly inferior. 
It is nevertheless of value as our only authority for the 

259 


260 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


titles of some lost works and even for extracts from them. 
For similar reasons the Saturnalia , in seven books, by 

Nonius Ambrosius Theodosius Macrobius, is of some 

Macrobius. importance. Macrobius, who was probably, 

Martianus like Nonius, an African, appears to be iden- 

Capeila. tical with the Macrobius who was proconsul 

of Africa in 410 a. d. The imaginary conversations of 
which his Saturnalia consists treat of Roman litera¬ 
ture and antiquities, especially of the poetry of Virgil. 
Like Gellius and Nonius, Macrobius uses the works of ear¬ 
lier critics and commentators, and gives many quotations 
from Greek and Roman authors. Macrobius also wrote a 
commentary on Cicero’s Dream of Scipio , in which he 
quotes many authors, especially Greeks, but displays little 
or no originality. The encyclopaedia, in nine books, writ¬ 
ten about the end of the fourth century by a third Afri¬ 
can, Martianus Capella, is of less value than the compila¬ 
tions of Nonius and Macrobius, though it, too, goes back 
to good authorities, such as Varro. 

The chief seat of philosophy in the fourth century 
was Athens, and philosophical writings were 
Grammar. 7 almost all in Greek. For the most part they 
expounded the mystical doctrines of Neopla¬ 
tonism. 1 The grammarian iElius Donatus, who flour¬ 
ished at Rome about 350 a. d. and was one of the teachers 


1 The chief Latin writer on philosophy was Firmicus Maternus, 
whose eight books, Matheseos (Of Learning), published about 354 
a. d., are occupied with Neoplatonic astrology. He is believed to 
have become a Christian and to be the same Firmicus Maternus 
who wrote of the Error of the Pagan Religions. Gaius Marius 
\ ictorinus, who also lived about the middle of the century, was 
an African by birth, but taught rhetoric at Rome. He was the 
author of philosophical works, chiefly translations and adaptations 
from the Greek, but is best known by his extant work on metres 
in four books, and by some other extant grammatical treatises. 
In his later life he became a Christian, and wrote commentaries 
on St. Paul’s epistles, besides some controversial tracts. 



THE FOURTH AND FIFTH CENTURIES 261 


of St. Jerome, wrote commentaries on Terence and. Virgil 
to which he prefixed the lives of the two poets from the 
lost work of Suetonius. The work on Virgil is lost, and 
the commentary on Terence contains in its present form 
many later additions. The extant grammars (Ars Gram- 
matica) of Charisius and Diomedes, which have preserved 
much of the learning of earlier grammarians, belong to a 
very slightly later time. The last and most complete an¬ 
cient grammar was written under the Emperor Anastasius 
(491-518 A. d.) at Constantinople in the Latin language 
by Priscian, from Caesarea, in Mauretania. This work, in 
eighteen books, is entitled Institutiones Grammatical and 
contains a vast quantity of material from the earlier lit¬ 
erature. Much of the grammatical terminology, even of 
the present time, is derived from Priscian. The impor¬ 
tant-commentary on Virgil by Servius was written in the 
latter part of the fourth century, and is preserved in two 
forms, in one of which numerous additions have been 
made to the original work. 1 

In 360 A. d., Aurelius Victor wrote a short history of 
the emperors ( Ccesares) from the time of Augustus to the 
tenth consulship of Constantius and Julian, i. e., to the 


1 These grammatical works have little literary value of their own, 
and owe their importance to the fact that they contain information 
which is not elsewhere preserved. The same is true of several hand¬ 
books of various kinds compiled in the fourth century. Such are the 
Itineraries, giving the distances and routes between the towns along 
the Roman roads, the Notitia, describing the regions of the city of 
Rome, and a historical handbook of Rome for the year 354 a. d. pre¬ 
served most fully in a manuscript in Vienna. A few maps of this 
period also exist, the most famous of which is the Peutinger Tablet 
(Tabula Peutingeriana ), now in Vienna. A handbook of Agriculture 
(De Re Rustica) by Palladius, and the Epitome of Military Science 
(Epitoma Rei Militaris) by Flavius Vegetius Renatus, who also wrote 
an extant treatise on Veterinary Medicine (Mulomedicina ), may 
properly be mentioned here, and these works possess also some slight 
literary interest. 



262 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


date of his writing. He makes free use of Suetonius, 
and his style is sometimes an imitation of that of Sallust. 

A second entirely distinct work attributed 
History. game au th 0 r is a brief epitome of the 

history of the emperors to the death of Theodosius I (395 
A. d.). Under Yalens (364-378 A. d.) Eutropius wrote a 
Breviarium ab Urbe Condita , a short sketch of Roman 
history from the beginning to the year 365 A. d., which is 
distinguished for its simple, easy style and pure Latinity, 
hut has no independent value as an historical work. 1 

Much more important is the Chronicle of St. Jerome 
(331-420 a. d.), a translation from the Greek of Eusebius 
with important additions. The Chronicle begins with the 
first year of Abraham (2016 b. c.). From this point to the 
Trojan War, Jerome merely translates Eusebius, from the 
Trojan War to 325 A. d. he translates Eusebius and adds 
much information concerning Roman history and litera¬ 
ture, and from 325 to 378 a. d. the work is entirely his 
own. His information concerning the history of Roman 
literature is derived chiefly from Suetonius ( De Viris II- 
lustribus ) and is of the utmost importance, though the 
dates given are sometimes wrong, which is not surprising 
when one remembers the carelessness in respect to dates 
exhibited by Suetonius in his extant Lives of the Ccesars. 
Jerome’s Chronicle was continued in the fifth century by 
Prosper of Aquitania to the year 455 A. D., and further ad¬ 
ditions were made after that time. The Chronicle is of 
great importance to the historian, but is itself merely the 
dry bones of history. The only real history that the last 
centuries of Roman literature produced, the only serious 
and original historical work after Tacitus, is that of 

1 In 369 a. d. Festus wrote a handbook similar to that of Eutro¬ 
pius, but of less merit. The list of prodigies that took place from 
249 to 12 b. c., compiled by Julius Obsequeus from an abridgment of 
Livy, probably belongs to about the same time. Since a large part of 
Livy’s history is lost, such works as these are of some value. 



THE FOURTH AND FIFTH CENTURIES 263 


Ammianus Marcellinus ; for the summary of universal 
history (Chronicorum Librill) written by the Aquita- 
nian Sulpicius Severus in the early years of the fifth 
century, and the more pretentious but no more original 
history of the world (Historiarum Adversus Paganos 
Libri VII) by Orosius of Spain, compiled soon after 417 
a. d., are even less important than the handbook of 
Eutropius. 

Ammianus Marcellinus (about 330-400 A. d.) was a 
Greek of Antioch, who became a soldier in the Roman 
army, served in Asia, in Gaul, and in the Per- 
Marceiiinus. s * an cam P a ign of the Emperor Julian, and was 
at some time in Egypt, but finally settled at 
Rome, where he wrote in Latin a continuation of Tacitus 
from Nerva to the death of Yalens (96-378 a. d.). The 
entire work consisted of thirty-one books, thirteen of 
which are lost; but the extant hooks (XIV-XXXI), treat¬ 
ing of the time from 353 to 378 A. D., and dealing with 
events in which the author took part, are especially 
valuable. Ammianus is an honest soldier, who, to use 
his own expression, never knowingly corrupts the truth 
by silence or falsehood, who has no liking and not much 
understanding for court intrigues, but is intent upon 
giving his readers a fair and unbiased account of events. 
His Latin is hard to understand, partly because he writes 
it as a foreigner, but still more because he wishes to 
write an ornate style and embellishes his work with many 
references to the Roman classics, sometimes quoting their 
exact words, oftener changing them a little, as if to show 
his perfect familiarity with the earlier literature. The 
geographical digressions introduced are not original de¬ 
scriptions of what Ammianus had himself seen, but are 
taken from Greek or Latin books. Although himself a 
pagan, Ammianus shows no hostility to Christianity, but 
his paganism is not very serious. He seems to believe 
that not all men think alike, and that on the whole it 
IS * 


264 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


is well for each to believe as he can. His pictures of 
the life of the times are admirable, and bring before us 
in a clear light the corruption and degeneration of the 
age. Yet he does not seem to feel righteous indigna¬ 
tion nor to understand that the greatness of the Roman 
empire is rapidly passing away. His history ends with 
the disastrous defeat of the Romans by the Goths at Ha- 
drianople and the death of the Emperor Valens; but so 
accustomed was the world to the power of the Roman em¬ 
pire that even this terrible reverse was not recognized as 
portending the end of the ancient order of things. For a 
little while Theodosius was able to maintain the integrity 
of the empire, but the end was at hand. It is not un¬ 
fitting that the last Roman historian, himself a Greek by 
birth, ends his work at a moment when more than ever 
before the Greek city of Constantinople was becoming the 
refuge of what remained of the old Roman civilization. 

The study of law, which had for centuries been among 
the most important pursuits of Roman thinkers, was not 
neglected in the last centuries of Roman life. 
Under Diocletian (284-305 A. D.) the imperial 
edicts were codified by Gregorianus, and in the reign of 
Constantine (323-337 A. d.) Hermogenianus continued the 
codification to his own time. In 438 a. d., under Theo¬ 
dosius II, the Codex Tlieodosianus was compiled by a com¬ 
mission of jurists, and in the reign of Justinian a com¬ 
mission headed by the distinguished jurist, scholar, and 
man of affairs Tribonian, gave to Roman law its final form 
in three great works: the Code , published in 529 A. D., the 
Pandects or Digests , and the Institutes , published in 533 
a. d., which have served as the basis for all later juris¬ 
prudence. 

Oratory found its chief field of activity in the Chris¬ 
tian pulpit from the time of Constantine, but was not con¬ 
fined to the exposition of Christian doctrine. The Gallic 
school of oratory continued to flourish, and indeed Gaul 


THE FOURTH AND FIFTH CENTURIES 


265 


Dictys and 
Dares. 


was prominent in literature of all kinds during the fourth 
and fifth centuries. Among other orators the most im¬ 
portant was Quintus Aurelius Symmachus, a 
Roman of noble family and honorable char¬ 
acter, whose life extended from about 345 to 405 A. D. 
His panegyrics on Yalentinian I and Gratianus resemble 
the other panegyrics of the period, and the fragmentary 
remains of later speeches delivered in the senate show no 
greater ability. More interesting are his letters, in which 
he appears as an imitator of the younger Pliny, and his 
official reports as prefect of the city. 

A curious prose version of the story of the Trojan War 
was written by Lucius Septimius, apparently in the second 
half of the fourth century. This purports to 
be a translation of an ancient Greek manu¬ 
script in Phoenician letters found in the 
tomb of a certain Dictys, in Crete. The story of the dis¬ 
covery of the manuscript is undoubtedly an invention, 
but the Latin account may be a translation of a lost 
Greek original. The style is artificial and full of anti¬ 
quated expressions. The author most persistently imi¬ 
tated is Sallust. A somewhat similar little work belong¬ 
ing to the fifth century pretends to be a translation by 
Cornelius Nepos of a Greek account of the Trojan War 
given by a Phrygian Dares, who fought among the Trojans. 
The style is dry and unattractive, but the little book was 
much read in the Middle Ages. These two works serve 
to give us some idea of the kind of literature which, 
alongside of the Greek novels, amused the leisure hours 
of cultivated persons. 

The contents of the works of the leaders of the church 
in the fourth and fifth centuries can hardly be considered 
in a history of Roman literature, but inas¬ 
much as their writings show the continued 
influence of classical Latin, their style and choice of words 
should be briefly mentioned. The bitter controversy be- 


Hilarius. 


266 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


tween the Arians and the Athanasians produced in the 
fourth century a great number of controversial writings, 
among which those of Hilarius (St. Hilary), Bishop of 
Poitiers, are remarkable for depth of philosophical thought 
and care in expression. Hilarius was born between 310 
and 320 A. d., and was trained in the Gallic school of elo¬ 
quence. After his conversion to Christianity he soon 
became bishop of his native Poitiers. His opposition to 
Arianism, which Constantius favored, led to his banish¬ 
ment, hut he was recalled after three years, in 358 a. d. 
His death took place in 367 A. d. Besides his controver¬ 
sial writings he was the author of commentaries on sev¬ 
eral hooks of the Old and New Testaments, and perhaps 
also of hymns. His style shows in some passages his 
early training in the school of wordy and ornate Gallic 
oratory, but is chiefly distinguished for its vigor and 
passion. Hilarius carried on the work of adapting Latin 
to the expression of Christian abstract thought, which 
had been begun in Africa by Tertullian. 

Ambrosius (St. Ambrose), who lived from about 340 
to 397 A. D., was probably horn in Gaul, where his father 

Ambrosius was P re ^ ec ^> but was Ro m an, not Gallic 
blood. After a careful education he became 
a barrister, and was soon raised to the consular rank and 
made governor of the provinces of Liguria and iEmilia. 
Thus he came to Milan, where he was chosen bishop in 
374 A. d. He was a man of great tact as well as firmness, 
who dared to exclude the Emperor Theodosius from the 
church, until he had shown repentance for the massacre 
at Tliessalonica, and to refuse the request of the Empress 
Justina that one of the churches at Milan be set aside for 
the Arians, but who succeeded in avoiding any breach 
with the emperor in spite of his independence. It was in 
great part due to St. Ambrose that Italy was kept from 
adopting the Arian heresy. His writings comprise letters, 
dogmatic treatises, practical treatises on the conduct of 


THE FOURTH AND FIFTH CENTURIES 267 


life, commentaries on the Scriptures, funeral orations on 
Valentinian II and Theodosius, and hymns. He is also 
the probable author of a translation of Josephus into 
Latin. In his mystic, allegorical interpretations of Scrip¬ 
ture St. Ambrose follows the Jewish-Stoic philosopher 
Philo, who lived about the time of Christ, and in his trea¬ 
tise On Duties he imitates Cicero’s work of the same title. 
His intimate acquaintance with other works of the clas¬ 
sical period is made evident both by the general quality of 
his style, which is purer than that of most of his contem¬ 
poraries, and by many special references. His hymns have 
had great influence upon church poetry and music. 

St. Jerome (Hieronymus) was born about 331 A. D., at 
Stridon, a town on the borders of Dalmatia and Pannonia, 
studied at Rome under Donatus, then spent 
ronymus j 116 " ^ wo y ears Treves, was afterwards at Aquileia 
for some time, then sailed to Syria. Here he 
was ill for a time, and solaced himself by reading the clas¬ 
sics, until he was warned by a dream to give up profane lit¬ 
erature. He retreated into the wilderness of Chalcis, where 
he remained five years. In 362 A. D. he returned to Rome, 
where he had great influence for many years, but in 386 
he retired to a monastery at Bethlehem. There he re¬ 
mained until his death, in 420 a. d. As a controversial 
writer St. Jerome had great influence in settling the doc¬ 
trines of the Catholic church; he also wrote commentaries 
on various books of the Bible, and numerous letters deal¬ 
ing with religious questions. His translation of the Bible 
was a masterly performance, and is the basis of the Latin 
Vulgate, still in use in the Roman Catholic church. He 
compiled a brief work, De Viris Illustrious, in which he 
gave sketches of the lives of Christian writers, as Sue¬ 
tonius, in his work of the same title, had given the lives 
of the old Roman authors. The sketches given by Jerome 
are, however, much briefer than were those of Suetonius. 
The translation and continuation of the Chronicle of 


268 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


Eusebius has already been mentioned (see page 262). St. 
Jerome is one of the ablest writers of the early Christian 
church, and certainly the most learned Christian writer 
of his time. His style is not exempt from the faults of 
exaggeration and verbal quibbling common in the wri¬ 
tings of the age, but possesses much life and earnestness, 
and is free from the affectation of classicism, though it 
shows the effect of his prolonged study of the classics. 

St. Augustine (Aurelius Augustinus) was born in 354 
A. d. at Tagaste, in Africa. His father was a pagan, his 
Augustine mother a Christian, and in his early years 
Augustine himself accepted the doctrine of 
Manicheeism, a sort of mystical materialism, which denied 
all authority, and claimed to rest entirely upon reason. 
He was a successful teacher of rhetoric in Africa, at Rome, 
and at Milan, where he came under the influence of St. 
Ambrose and was converted. In 388 A. D. he returned to 
Africa, became presbyter at Hippo in 392, and bishop in 
395 A. d. His death took place in 430 A. D. His nature 
was many sided, and composed of apparently contradictory 
elements. He was a mystic speculator, a sharp reasoner, 
at one time harsh and uncompromising, at another full of 
tenderness, an original thinker yet a believer in authority, 
dreamer, poet, philosopher, rhetorician, and quibbler in 
one. His writings are in part speculations on theology, 
in part ponderings on the soul, its nature and its relations 
to God, and in part controversial treatises, sermons, com¬ 
mentaries, and letters. The best known among them are 
the Confessions , in which Augustine gives many details of 
his life, and records the doubts that perplexed him, 
and the City of God (De Civitate Dei), a work of his old 
age, in which he contrasts the city (or better, the state) 
of this world with the ideal city of God. This work was 
written in reply to the pagans, who claimed that the sack 
of Rome by Alaric was due to the neglect of the ancient 
worship. It consists of twenty-two books, in the first ten 


THE FOURTH AND FIFTH CENTURIES 269 


of which the “vain opinions adverse to the Christian 
religion ” are refuted, while the twelve remaining are de¬ 
voted to a presentation of Christian truth, though each 
division contains many digressions, and in each the part 
of the subject properly belonging to the other is treated 
as occasion demands. In many parts of this great work 
reference is made to Cicero’s De Re Pullica and other 
philosophical writings, and Augustine’s dialogue Contra 
Academicos is an evident imitation of Cicero’s Academics. 
Yet it can not be said that Augustine’s style is modelled 
upon that of Cicero. It is rather a style which had gradu¬ 
ally developed among Christian writers, in which the 
periodic structure of the Ciceronian age is abandoned for 
the most part, many words unknown to strictly classical 
Latin have been introduced, partly from the popular 
speech and partly by new formation to express abstract 
ideas, not a few Biblical phrases are employed, and some 
slight changes in syntax are noticeable. This is the Latin 
of the church, which has remained nearly as St. Augustine 
left it, except in so far as the strictly classical element 
grew less in the centuries preceding the Renaissance. 
For St. Augustine the “ state ” of this world still means 
the Roman empire, though the eternal city had been 
sacked by the Goths, but the time seems to him not far 
distant when the state of God shall rest in the “ stability 
of its eternal seat.” So his language is still Latin; but his 
thoughts and sentiments are Christian, not Roman. The 
ancient world was still visible about him, but the life of 
the Middle Ages had begun. 

The fourth century produced a considerable number 
of poets who possessed no mean skill in versification, but 
whose works have for the most part disappeared. Opta- 
tianus (Publilius Optatianus Porphyrius) com¬ 
posed a poem in praise of Constantine in which 
he shows his ingenuity by writing lines that take the 
shape of an altar or an organ, contriving to make fifteen 


Optatianus. 


270 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


Juvencus. 


Avienus. 


successive hexameters each one letter shorter than its 
predecessor, making nineteen stanzas of four lines each 
from the same twenty words, and inventing the most com¬ 
plicated and elaborate acrostics and the like. Such work 
is not poetry, but it shows skill in the manipulation of 
words. It is interesting to know that Constantine was so 
pleased that he recalled the ingenious author from banish¬ 
ment. About the same time Juvencus (Gaius 
Vettius Aquilinus Juvencus) made a version 
of the Gospel story in hexameters after the manner of 
Virgil. He shows intelligent appreciation of the dignity 
and beauty of his model, and writes skillfully and easily. 
This Latin poem is the prototype of the “ Gospel Harmo¬ 
nies” of the Middle Ages. Avienus (Rufus Festus Avie¬ 
nus), of Vulsinii, in Etruria, was a descendant 
of the Stoic philosopher Musonius Rufus (see 
page 177), and was twice proconsul—in Africa in 366 and 
in Greece in 371 A. d. He translated the Phenomena of 
Aratus into Latin verse, and tried to improve upon the 
translations by Cicero and Germanicus (see pages 70 and 
173), made a similar translation with variations from the 
Periegesis of Dionysius, described the coasts of the Black 
Sea, the Caspian, and the Mediterranean in iambic trime¬ 
ters, and made abridgments of Livy and Virgil in the 
same metre. These last are lost, as is a large part of the 
description of the coasts. Avienus was also the author of 
several short poems. He has no little ability as a maker 
of verses, and has the good taste to imitate Virgil, but ex¬ 
hibits no poetic originality. His language is for the most 
part strictly classic. To about the same time as Avienus 
belongs also a curious comedy entitled Quero- 
lus (The Discontented Mari), a free imitation 
of the Aulularia of Plautus, composed in a remarkable 
mixture of prose and verse. 

The only really interesting poet of the fourth century 
is, however, Ausonius, whose life extends through nearly 


Querolus. 


THE FOURTH AND FIFTH CENTURIES 271 


the entire century. Decimus Magnus Ausonius was born 
at Bordigala (Bordeaux) about 310 a. d. He became a 
Ausonius. teacher of rhetoric and oratory, and was ap¬ 
pointed tutor to Gratian, the son of the Em¬ 
peror Yalens. When Gratian became emperor he rewarded 
his teacher with public offices, and raised him in 379 A. d. 
to the consulate. After Gratian’s death (383 A. d.) Auso¬ 
nius retired from public life and devoted himself to liter¬ 
ary pursuits at his native Bordeaux until his death, which 
took place not far from 395 a. d. Nearly all his extant 
writings belong to this period. The only considerable 
specimen of his prose extant is the oration in which he 
expressed his thanks to Gratian for the consulship. In 
this the style, though somewhat flowery, is not without 
dignity, and the vocabulary is pretty strictly classic. The 
extant poems are of various kinds and in various metres. 
They include epigrams, idylls, letters, a series of short 
poems called Parentalia , devoted to the poet’s relatives, a 
Commemoratio Professorum Burdigalensium, describing 
his colleagues at Bordeaux, verses on the Roman emperors, 
on famous cities, and a variety of other subjects. Some 
of these show cleverness in the use of language, but no 
higher quality. Such are the letters written partly in 
Greek and partly in Latin, and the idylls so composed 
that the last word of each line is a monosyllable; but 
among the poems are some of considerable interest even 
though their poetic qualities are not of the highest. So 
the Parentalia and the verses on the Bordeaux professors 
give the reader some insight into the life of an important 
provincial city. It is interesting, too, to observe that of 
the seventeen cities mentioned in the List of Famous 
Cities five are in Gaul. To be sure, Ausonius was himself 
a Gaul, and may have made his native region unduly 
prominent, but other evidence, including the remains of 
ancient buildings, supports his estimate of the importance 
of the Gallic cities. His lines on Bordeaux, famous for 


272 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


its wine, its culture, its fertile soil, great rivers, copious 
water supply, and fine buildings, show his patriotism and 
his skill in descriptive writing. The latter quality is con¬ 
spicuous in the most famous of his idylls, the one entitled 
Mosella , in which Ausonius describes the stream and the 
valley of the Moselle, which he had visited on some busi¬ 
ness not further specified. The vine-clad hills and grassy 
meadow lands, the roofs of villas that stand upon the 
banks, the broad, clear river, calm and placid as a lake, 
are all brought before our eyes with clear, well-chosen 
words and a masterly lightness of touch. At the same 
time the poet’s love of nature and her beauties is as 
plainly manifest as in any poem of Wordsworth or Whit¬ 
tier. Unfortunately, Ausonius proceeds to mention all 
the different kinds of fish in the Moselle, and the remark¬ 
able productivity of the river does not add to the attrac¬ 
tiveness of the poem. Yet the poem is deservedly famous 
for its beauty of expression and its enthusiastic love of 
nature. It is also remarkably modern in its tone. Satyrs 
and Naiads are mentioned, but only as a modern poet might 
mention them. Ausonius is a Christian, and for him the 
pagan deities of the woods are only beings which he 
“might imagine.” This poem shows as clearly as the 
Pervigilium Veneris , though in a different way, that the 
spirit of the Middle Ages was awake. 

Ausonius was a Christian, but his poems have no spe¬ 
cifically Christian contents. The most important specific- 
Prudentius Christian poet of the fourth century is 

Aurelius Prudentius Clemens, who was born 
in Spain, at or near Saragossa, in 348 A. d., studied and 
practised oratory, and held important offices. His life 
was apparently passed for the most part in Spain, but at 
one time he held a position at the imperial court of Theo¬ 
dosius. The date of his death is probably about 410 a. d. 
Prudentius, like Ausonius, employs hexameters and vari¬ 
ous other classic metres, in which he departs occasionally, 


THE FOURTH AND FIFTH CENTURIES 273 


but not often, from the rules of quantitative verse. His 
poems, both epic and lyric, are religious and inspired by 
earnest faith and genuine enthusiasm. He excels in nar¬ 
rative and description, in wealth and brilliancy of lan¬ 
guage, but lacks the virtue of simplicity. His poetry was 
intended to appeal to educated readers, not to the people, 
and the cultured classes of the time were only too thor¬ 
oughly accustomed to an artificial style. Yet, in spite of 
his faults of style, Prudentius is the most important Chris¬ 
tian poet of the fourth century, and among the other 
poets of the time none equal him except Ausonius and 
Claudian. 

Claudius Claudianus, the last important Roman poet, 
was, like Livius Andronicus, with whom Roman poetry 
Claudian began, a Greek by birth. He was born in 
Asia Minor, but lived so long at Alexandria 
that he called that centre of learning his fatherland 
(patria). In 395 a. d. he went to Rome, where he was 
attached to the court of Honorius, from whom he received 
the rank of patrician and the honor of a statue in the 
Forum of Trajan. He remained at Rome, or rather at 
Milan, until 404 a. d., but about that time returned to 
Alexandria, and married a noble woman of the place, 
being aided in his suit by Serena, niece and adopted 
daughter of the Emperor Theodosius and wife of Stilicho. 
Claudian’s poems all appear to have been written from 
395 to 404 A. d., and throughout this period he is the 
faithful follower and enthusiastic admirer of Stilicho. 
Whether Stilicho’s death in 408 a. d. relegated Claudian 
to obscurity, or the poet himself died at about the same 
time as his patron, can not now be determined. Clau¬ 
dian’s works comprise epic poems on the important events 
of his times, such as the Gothic war and the war against 
Gildo, mythological epics, and shorter miscellaneous poems. 
Among the historical epics are included poems in praise 
of Honorius and other patrons of the poet, as well as met- 


274 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


rical attacks upon Rufinus and Eutropius. The only 
remains of his mythological epics are three books of a poem 
on the Rape of Proserpine , and somewhat more than one 
hundred lines of a Gigantomachia. In these poems Clau- 
dian shows the mythological and antiquarian learning 
which had for centuries been characteristic of the Alex¬ 
andrian school of poetry. That school was already old 
when it was imitated by Catullus and his contempora¬ 
ries in the early days of Roman poetry, and now, when Ro¬ 
man literature was dying, Alexandria continued to train 
learned poets. Had Claudian not gone to Italy, he would 
doubtless have continued to write in his native Greek, 
and might, as a Greek poet, have rivalled his contempo¬ 
rary Nonnus. In his historical and miscellaneous poems 
also Claudian exhibits much Alexandrian learning, and at 
the same time shows an intimate acquaintance with the 
earlier Roman poets, which is somewhat surprising in one 
who was educated in the Greek-speaking provinces of the 
east. It is equally surprising that Claudian uses the Latin 
language with an ease and grace not attained by any of 
his contemporaries. His verse is correct, dignified, and 
harmonious, his diction pure and classical. In these re¬ 
spects, as well as in wealth of imagery, brilliancy of narra¬ 
tive, and skill in composition, he is unequalled by any 
Roman poet after Statius. His historical poems must be 
used with caution by historians, for, although facts are 
not invented, they are presented in a strong light, or left 
in obscurity, according to the effect they might have upon 
the reputation of the poet’s friends or enemies. In the 
exuberance of his praise, Claudian equals the contempo¬ 
rary prose panegyrists, and surpasses the early Alexandrian 
and most of the later Roman poets. Among his miscel¬ 
laneous poems none is so well known in modern times, or 
so modern in tone, as the brief elegy of only twenty-two 
lines, on an old man of Verona, who never left his suburb, 
who pressed his staff upon the same sand in which he had 


THE FOURTH AND FIFTH CENTURIES 275 


crept, counted his years by the changes of crops, not by 
consuls, and saw the trees grow old which he had seen as 
little sprouts. The advantages of a quiet, humble life 
have seldom been more charmingly set forth than in this 
poem. 

With all his learning, skill, and genuine poetic inspira¬ 
tion, Claudian is still the belated singer of a worn-out 
empire and a dying civilization. Rome was no longer the 
mighty and unquestioned ruler of the world. The poet 
whose chief task it was to sing the praises of Stilicho, and 
spread the glory of his victories, must needs shut his eyes, 
so far as possible, to the evident decay, but he could not 
simulate utter blindness. In the beginning of his poem 
on the war with Gildo, Claudian shows that the feebleness 
and old age of Rome were not hidden from him. He 
describes the personified city, the goddess Roma, as she 
approaches Olympus to beg for aid against Gildo, whose 
revolt, involving the loss of the African grain supply, 
threatened to expose the city to famine : 

Her voice is weak, and slow her steps; her eyes 
Deep sunk within; her cheeks are gone; her arms 
Are shrivelled up with wasting leanness. On 
Her feeble shoulders hardly can she bear 
Her tarnished shield; she shows from loosened helm 
Her hoary locks, and drags a rusty spear. 1 

Even the poet who sang of Rome’s victories could 
portray her in such terms as these. Yet the tradition of 
Roman greatness still survived. In the year 
Namatianus. Rutilius Claudius Namatianus, a Gaul 

who had risen to the position of prafectus urbi at Rome, 
was obliged to return to Gaul to attend to his property, 
which had been laid waste by the Goths. The journey 
was the occasion of a poem in two books, most of which 


1 De Bello Gildonico, i, 21-25. 



276 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


is preserved. It is written in elegiacs, with much skill 
and feeling. Many episodes and descriptions are inserted 
in the narrative, hut no passage is so striking as that in 
which the traveller, passing out from the Ostian gate, 
addresses the imperial city: 

Wide as the ambient ocean is thy sway, 

And broad thy empire as the realms of day; 

Still on thy bounds the sun’s great march attends, 

With thee his course begins, with thee it ends. 

Thy strong advance nor Afric’s burning sand, 

Nor frozen horrors of the Pole withstand; 

Thy valor, far as kindly Nature’s bound 
Is fixed for man, its dauntless way has found. 

All nations own in thee their common land, 

And e’en the guilty bless thy conquering hand; 

One right for weak, for strong, thy laws create, 

And bind the wide world in a world-wide State. 1 

The history of Roman poetry is virtually at an end with 
Claudian. Other poets there were, but none whose works 
Avianus. are living and breathing exponents of the 

Seduiius. ancient Roman life. About 400 a. d. Avianus 

Dracontius. published forty-two fables of AEsop in elegiac 
verse; about the middle of the fifth century the presbyter 
Seduiius wrote several religious poems, in which he shows 
acquaintance not with Biblical literature alone, but also 
with the Latin classics; and at the end of the century the 
African poet Blossius iEmilius Dracontius wrote a didac¬ 
tic poem On the Praise of God , in three books, a number 
of short epics, chiefly mythological, and several other 
poems. Dracontius is not unskillful in his versification 
and his use of language, and his poems prove that rhetor¬ 
ical training was still to be found in Africa. Moreover, 
his knowledge of the Roman classics is as evident as his 
knowledge of the Bible. But neither Dracontius nor the 


1 Be Reditu Suo , i, 55-66. Translated by A. J. Church. 



THE FOURTH AND FIFTH CENTURIES 277 


other poets whose works are preserved to us from the 
fifth century could do more than help to pass on to the 
Middle Ages something of the ancient feeling for beauty 
of form in literature. And even that had ceased to be 
understood by the people. 


CHAPTER XXI 

CONCLUSION 


The end of the ancient civilization—Boethius, about 480-524 a. d.— 
Later literature no longer Roman—Practical character of Roman 
literature—The first period—The Augustan period—The period of 
the empire—Our debt to the Romans. 

Long before the end of the fifth century the power 
of Eome was broken, and the centre of what had been 
the Roman empire was at Constantinople. The western 
provinces were in the hands of barbarians, Angles and 
Saxons ruled in Britain, Franks in northern Gaul, Visi¬ 
goths in southern Gaul and Spain, and Vandals in Africa. 
The end Italy itself had been repeatedly overrun by 
of the old hardy warriors from the north, and Rome had 
civilization, twice been sacked, by the Goths under Alaric 
in 410 and by the Vandals under Genseric in 455 a. d. 
With the establishment by Theodoric, in 493 a. d., of the 
Gothic kingdom with its seat at Ravenna, the last vestige 
of the Roman empire of the West passed away. Hence¬ 
forth western Europe is the scene of strife and disorder, 
through which men were to struggle onward to the new 
order of modern life. In the empire of the East much of 
the old civilization survived, and throughout the Middle 
Ages the ancient culture still shed some rays of light from 
Constantinople to the darkened west; but in western Eu¬ 
rope there was little culture, and learning was for the 
most part shut up in the walls of monasteries. 

The last writer who seems to belong to the old civili¬ 
zation is Boethius. Anicius Manlius Torquatus Severinus 
278 


CONCLUSION 


279 


Boethius. 


Boethius was a Roman of noble birth and exalted station. 
He was born about 480 A. d., and after his father’s death 
was adopted by the patrician Symmachus, 
whose daughter he afterwards married. In 
500 a. d. he delivered in the senate a speech in honor of 
Theodoric, who made frequent use of his learning and 
literary skill. He held important offices at Rome, received 
the title of patrician, and in 510 A. d. became consul with¬ 
out a colleague. In 522 A. D. his two sons were made 
consuls, and the joyful father delivered an oration in 
praise of the Gothic king to whose favor they owed their 
elevation. But that favor was destined soon to pass from 
Boethius. The emperor of the East, Justin, tried to stir 
up the Catholic Italians to revolt against the Arian Theo¬ 
doric. Boethius was suspected, arrested, and put to death 
with tortures in 524 a. d. The servile senate decreed his 
death without even the formality of a trial. 

Boethius was a prolific writer. He translated from 
the Greek various philosophical and mathematical trea¬ 
tises, to some of which he added commentaries, and the 
importance of the Aristotelian logic during the Middle 
Ages is in great measure due to him; he also wrote a 
bucolic poem, which is lost, and several treatises on points 
of Christian doctrine ; but the work by which he is now 
best known, and to which he owes his reputation as the 
The Conso- last R° man author, is the treatise On the Con- 
lation of solation of Philosophy {De Consolatione Phil- 
PhiloSophy, osophice ), which he wrote in prison while 
waiting for his condemnation. This work consists of five 
books, and has the literary form of a satura —that is, the 
prose is interrupted and varied by the insertion of passages 
in verse. These metrical passages, although their rhythms 
and diction are excellent, do not show the same depth of 
thought as the prose portions. This is explained by the 
fact that the prose portions of the treatise are derived in 
great measure from the Protrepticus of Aristotle, while 
19 


280 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


the verses are more entirely the work of Boethius himself. 
It is not likely that Boethius employed the Protrepticus 
directly, but he probably had before him some work in 
which Aristotle’s teachings had been modified by the 
eclecticism of the later Platonists. Everywhere noble 
sentiments are expressed, but without the slightest indi¬ 
cation of Christianity, or of any specific religion. The 
names of the pagan deities are used, but Boethius believes 
in them no more than did Milton or the numerous writers 
of the eighteenth century in whose works their names 
occur. The attitude of Boethius is throughout that of a 
cultivated and intellectual man who seeks for consolation 
when in trouble not in faith, but in reason. In the begin¬ 
ning of the work he laments his hard fate, when Philos¬ 
ophy appears before him in the form of a woman, and a 
dialogue ensues, in which the unimportance of what is 
ordinarily termed good or bad fortune, the nature of 
Providence, the divine order of the world, chance, free 
will, and similar subjects, are discussed. The style is the 
artificial, ornate style of the time, held in check by the 
logical sequence of the argument. Boethius was a Chris¬ 
tian, but in his adversity he turned to philosophy for 
consolation, and his philosophy is no more Christian than 
is that of Cicero. Yet his teachings, though not belong¬ 
ing to any one religion, are essentially religious. It is not 
wonderful that the Consolation was much read in the 
Middle Ages, and has continued to find many readers in 
later times. 

There were still, in the sixth century, men who, like 
Boethius, could find, amid the disorders of the times, the 
Later litera- leisure an d the taste for study ; and the only 
ture no kind of study possible was that of the ancient 
Roman literature. But Boethius is the last in whom 
the ancient thoughts and feelings appear clad 
in literary form. Throughout the Middle Ages some of 
the classical writers, especially Virgil, were read and copied 


CONCLUSION 


281 


in monasteries, and those laymen who received a clerkly 
education learned Latin as the only language (except the 
more distant and difficult Greek) in which a literature 
existed; but Latin was then, as now, a language of the 
past, even though it was still used for literary purposes, 
and the ancient civilization was far less understood than 
now. Writings in Latin after Boethius belong not to 
Roman literature, but to the literature of the church and 
to that of the various nations of Europe. 

The date of the beginning of Roman literature can be 
fixed almost to a year, for there was no Roman literature 
before Livius Andronicus. At that time Latin imitations 
of Greek works were introduced to add to the attractions 
of public entertainments and to make the young ac- 
The first pe- quainted with the history of the past. As 
riod of Roman the republic grew in power, literature, still in 
literature. imitation of the Greek, but expressing more 
and more completely the Roman character, developed in 
all directions, but especially in prose. The orators culti¬ 
vated perfection in speech that they might move the 
judges, the senate, or the people; historians hoped that 
the records of the past would have a practical effect upon 
the deeds of the future, or they aimed, like Caesar in his 
Commentaries , to further their own immediate ends; and 
Cicero adapted Greek philosophy to Roman readers in 
order that the republic might have wise and good citizens. 
The practical purpose of the lyric poetry of Catullus and 
his contemporary poets is less evident, though even lyric 
verse may serve political ends, and yet there seems to 
have been in the careful imitation of learned Alexandrian 
works a deliberate educational purpose. Certainly in all 
branches of literature except lyric poetry throughout the 
republican period a practical purpose, and usually a polit¬ 
ical purpose, is almost invariably to be found. Literature 
as developed by the Greeks seemed to the Romans to pos¬ 
sess practical utility, and the great works of the repub- 


282 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


lican period were created by practical men to aid in the 
attainment of their ends. 

In the Augustan period the practical purpose of litera¬ 
ture is even more evident than in the earlier years. In 
the transition from the republic to the monarchy it was 
The Augustan ^ es ^ ra ^ e that the m i n ds of men should not 
period. be too muc h occupied with politics, and liter¬ 

ature was naturally encouraged by Augustus 
as an outlet for intellectual energy which might other¬ 
wise have turned to political matters. It was also desir¬ 
able that the Julian family be connected as closely as pos¬ 
sible with the beginnings of Rome, and how could that be 
done better than by such a poem as the ^fineid ? The im¬ 
mediate practical purpose of Virgil’s Georgies is evident. 
The poems of Horace, too, are in part openly intended to 
increase the popular prestige of the imperial house, and 
the mere fact that the poet was known to be the friend 
of the emperor would add as much to the glory of the one 
as of the other. The greatness of poetry in this period is 
due directly to the encouragement of Augustus, and his 
encouragement had a practical purpose. That prose, espe¬ 
cially oratory, declined at this time is due to the fact that 
the orator was no longer the great power in the state. 

Under the empire the influence of literature upon poli¬ 
tics disappeared. Oratory no longer led to the highest 
power, poetry must, under some emperors at least, be care¬ 
ful not to overstep prescribed limits, and history could 
not safely record all facts with their causes and results. 
Even philosophical speculation was not safe if it led to 
practical conclusions adverse to the government. It was 
precisely those branches of literature which 
period! Perial m ight be used for political purposes that the 
imperial government could hardly fail to dis¬ 
courage directly or indirectly, and those were the branches 
in which the practical Romans naturally excelled. There 
were, to be sure, emperors who encouraged literature, but 


CONCLUSION 


283 


their encouragement, leading to flattery and artificial elo¬ 
quence, was little likely to raise the quality, even though 
it increased the quantity, of literary production. With 
its practical importance Roman literature loses its vigor. 
Aside from Tacitus and Juvenal, hardly a single powerful 
and vigorous author appears in the imperial period until, 
with the growth of Christianity, literature again acquires 
practical importance. That literature maintained for so 
many years a relatively high degree of excellence is due 
to the constant influence of Greece, which counteracted 
to some extent the forces that tended to destroy all liter¬ 
ary life. Thus Roman literature lingered on until after 
the breaking up of the Roman empire. 

Only a small part of the great bulk of Roman litera¬ 
ture is preserved to us, but that part includes the greatest 
works of the best period. Those are worthy subjects of 
study for their beauty of form, their clearness of thought, 
their power, their vigor, and their ethical qualities. The 
productions of the imperial period are inferior in quality 
to those of the republican and the Augustan times, though 
their quantity is proportionate to the duration of the em¬ 
pire ; hut these works also are proper subjects of study, 
for they also express the character of the Romans. 

Three ancient peoples have impressed themselves 
strongly upon the nations of Europe and America—the 
Hebrews, the Greeks, and the Romans. To the first we 
owe the foundations of our religion, to the second the be¬ 
ginnings of all arts and sciences, to the Romans we are 
indebted for the adaptation of the arts and sciences, of 

philosophy, and even of religion to civilized 

Our debt to names 0 f our m0 nths are Roman, 

the Romans. 

and our calendar is, with slight necessary 
changes, that established by Julius Caesar. The laws of 
continental Europe and, though to a less degree, of Eng¬ 
land and the United States, are based upon Roman law as 
finally established under Justinian. The so-called Gothic 


284 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


architecture, which arose iu France in the Middle Ages and 
which is still the prevailing style of our churches, can be 
traced back step by step to Roman buildings, and though 
Roman architecture was dependent upon that of Greece, 
it was through Rome that western Europe learned to use 
the column, the arch, and the vault. The beautiful archi¬ 
tecture of the Renaissance is a conscious imitation of that 
of Rome. The Romans, too, in the early centuries of the 
Christian church, did their full share to systematize Chris¬ 
tian belief, to reconcile it with philosophy, and to estab¬ 
lish a reasonable form of church government. The results 
of their labors are inherited directly by the Roman Catho¬ 
lic church, and indirectly or partially by Protestants. 
There is hardly a side of modern life which is not more 
or less affected by ancient Rome ; while the dignity, the 
sturdy manhood, the stoical disregard of fortune, the 
patriotism, and the vigorous earnestness expressed in Ro¬ 
man literature have a powerful influence in developing 
what is best in modern manhood. Roman literature will 
continue to be an important object of study as long as 
men still feel their obligations to the past, or are capable 
of learning from the example and precepts of other ages. 


APPENDIX I 

BIBLIOGRAPHY 


[This is not intended to be an exhaustive bibliography, but is merely an 
attempt to refer the student to some of the best and most available sources of 
information. Books in foreign languages, and editions with notes in foreign 
languages, are mentioned only in exceptional cases and for special reasons. 
Further bibliographical information is to be found in the larger histories of 
Roman literature, in Engelmann’s Bibliotheca Scriptorum Clalssicorum, the 
lists in the Classical Review, the American Journal of Philology, and other 
periodicals, and the Guide to the Choice of Classical Books, by J. B. Mayor, 
London, 1879, D. Nutt; with its New Supplement, 1896.] 

General Works 

C. T. Cruttwell. History of Roman Literature, London, 1877, 
Griffin. 

J. W. Mackail. Latin Literature, London, 1895, Murray; 
New York, Scribner’s. 

G. A. Simcox. History of Latin Literature, London and New 
York, 1883, Longmans, 2 vols. 

G. Middleton and T. R. Mills. Handbook to Latin Authors, 
London and New York, 1896, Macmillan. 

M. S. Dimsdale. A History of Latin Literature, New York, 
1915, D. Appleton & Co. 

W. Y. Sellar. The Roman Poets of the Republic, Oxford, 3d 
ed. 1889; Poets of the Augustan Age (Virgil), Oxford, 2d 
ed., 1899; Horace and the Elegiac P6ets, Oxford, 1892. 

R. Y. Tyrrell. Latin Poetry, Boston, 1895, Houghton & 
Mifflin. 

H. E. Butler, Post-Augustan Poetry from Seneca to Juvenal, 
Oxford, 1909, Clarendon Press. 

W. C. Summers. The Silver Age of Latin Literature from 
Tiberius to Trajan, London, 1920, Methuen (New York, 
Frederick A. Stokes & Co.). 

W. S. Teuffel. Geschichte der romischen Litteratur, 6th ed. 
revised by Kroll and Skutsch, Leipzig, 1910-’16, Teubner; 

285 


286 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


translated by G. C. W. Warr, 2 vols., London, 1891, Bell. 
[Especially good for bibliography.] 

M. Schanz. Romisehe Litteraturgeschichte, Munich, 3d ed. 
1907-’09, Beck. 4 vols. 

F. Leo. Geschichte der romischen Litteratur, Berlin, 1013- , 
Weidmann. 

O. Ribbeck. Geschichte der romischen Dichtung. 3 vols. 
Stuttgart, 1887-’92. 

W. Soltau. Die Anfange der Romischen Geschichtsschrei- 
bung, Leipzig, 1909. 

C. Lamarre. Histoire de la Litterature latine depuis la Fon- 
dation de Rome jusqu’a la Fin du Gouvernement Repub- 
licain; Paris, 1901, Delagrave. 4 vols. [Vol. iv contains 
selections from Latin literature in the original and in 
French translation.] 

C. Lamarre. Histoire de la Litterature latine au temps 
d’Auguste, Paris, 1907, J. Lamarre. 

G. Michaut. Le Genie latin. Paris, 1900 Fontemoing. [In¬ 
teresting and suggestive.] 

J. E. Sandys. A Companion to Latin Studies, Cambridge, 
3d ed., 1921, University Press (chapters by various authors; 
a very valuable book as an aid to the understanding of 
Latin literature). 

F. de Plessis. La poesie latine, Paris, 1909, Klincksieck. 

Collections 

[This list contains the titles of collections referred to below. Many other 

collections exist, the titles of which are to be found in larger bibliographies.] 

Poetae Latini Minores, ed. Baehrens. 5 vols. Leipzig, 1879- 

’83, Teubner series. 

Fragmenta Poetarum Romanorum, ed. Baehrens , Leipzig, 
1886, Teubner series. 

Corpus Poetarum Latinorum, ed. J. P. Post gate; parts i, ii, 
(vol. i), and iii. London, 1893-1900, Bell. 

Patrologia Latina, ed. Migne, Paris. [221 vols. containing 
the works of ecclesiastical writers of Latin from the Apos¬ 
tolic times to those of Pope Innocent III.] 

Corpus Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum Latinorum. [A series of 
ecclesiastical writings, published by the Imperial Academy 
at Vienna, begun in 1866 and not yet completed.] 


APPENDIX I 


287 


Scaenicae Romanorum Poesis Fragmenta, ed. 0. Ribbeck. 2 
vols. Leipzig, 1897-’98, Teubner series. [Vol. i, Tragi- 
corum Romanorum Fragmenta; vol. ii, Comieorum Ro¬ 
manorum Fragmenta.] 

Grammatici Latini, ed. H. Keil, Leipzig, 1857-’80, Teubner, 
7 vols. 

Historicorum Romanorum ReUicpiiae ed. H. Peter, vol. i, 
Leipzig, 1870, Teubner. 

Historicorum Romanorum Fragmenta, ed. H. Peter, Leipzig, 
1883, Teubner series. 

Scriptores Historiae Augustae, ed. H. Peter, Leipzig. 2 vols. 
Teubner series. 

Anthologia Latina, ed. F. Biicheler and A. Riese, Leipzig, 
2d ed., 1906. 2 vols. Teubner series. 

XII Panegyrici Latini, ed. Baehrens. Leipzig, 1874, Teubner 
series. 

Scriptores Rustici, ed. H. Keil, Leipzig Teubner. 

Oratorum Romanorum Fragmenta, ed. Meyer. Paris, 1837. 

The Loeb Classical Library. In this series the works of all 
classical Greek and Latin writers are to appear, as well 
as many works not ordinarily regarded as classical. The 
first volumes of the Library appeared in 1912. More 
than one hundred Greek volumes and more than fifty Latin 
volumes have now (1922) been published, and the number 
is constantly growing. Each volume contains the Greek or 
Latin text, with English translation. Both texts and trans¬ 
lations are carefully prepared by competent scholars. 

Editions and Translations 

Accius. Text in Fragm. Poet. Rom., vol. i, and Scaen. Rom. 
Poes. Fragm., vol. i. 

^Etna. Text in Corp. Poet. Lat., part iii, and Poet. Lat. 
Min., vol. ii. Text with notes and translation by Robinson 
Ellis, Oxford, 1901. Text with German translation, Sud- 
haus, Leipzig, 1898, Teubner; with French translation, 
Vessereau, Paris, 1905, Fontemoing. 

Ambrosius (St. Ambrose). Text, Schenkl, Vienna, 1896-1913; 
also in Patrologia Latina, vols. xiv-xvii. 

Ammianus Marcellinus. Text, C. V. Clark, Berlin, 1910, 
Weidmann; Gardthausen, Leipzig. 3 vols. Teubner. 


288 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


Translation. C. D. Yonge, London, 1862, in Bohn’s Li¬ 
brary. 

Ampelius. Text. Wolfflin in Halm’s Florus, Leipzig, 1854, 
Teubner series. 

Andronious. See Livius. 

Aphthonius. Text in Grammat. Lat., vol. vi. 

Apuleius. Text Helm and Thomas, Leipzig, 1905-’10 (and 
later edition), Teubner; with Latin notes, Hildebrand, 
Leipzig, 1842. 2 vols.; with translation, W. Adlington and 
S. Gaselee, 1915, Loeb Classical Library (only golden Ass.). 

Translation. H. E. Butler, Oxford, 1909-1910, Claren¬ 
don Press; anonymous, in Bohn’s Library. 

Arnobius. Text. Reifferscheid, vol. iv of Corp. Script. Eccl. 
Lat. Also in Patrol. Lat., vol. v. 

Atta. Text in Scaen. Rom. Poesis Fragm., vol. ii. 

Atticus. Text in Hist. Rom. Fr. 

Augustinus (St. Augustine). Text. Corpus Script. Eccl. 
Lat., vols. xxxiii ft.; Patrol. Lat., vols. xxxii-xlvii; De 
Civitate Dei, Dombart, Leipzig, 1877, 2 vol., Teubner 
series; Confessiones, Raumer, Gutersloh, 1876, Bertels¬ 
mann. 

Translation. Ed. Marcus Dods, Edinburgh, 1871-’92, 15 
vols. City of God, John Healey, London, 1913, Dent; Con¬ 
fessions, E. B. Pusey, London, 1909, Chatto & Windus 
(New York, E. P. Dutton). 

Augustus. Monumentum Ancyranum, Mommsen, 2d ed. 
Berlin, 1883, Weidmann; W. Fairley (with English trans¬ 
lation), Philadelphia, 1898, the University of Philadel¬ 
phia. 

Fragments, Weichart, Grimma, 1845. 

Aurelius (Marcus Aurelius). See Fronto. 

Ausonius. Text. Peiper, Leipzig, 1886, Teubner series. 

Text and translation. H. G. Evelyn White, 1919-, Loeb 
Classical Library. 

Avianus. Text. Poet. Lat. Min. vol. v; critical text and 
notes. R. Ellis, Oxford, 1887. 

Avienus. Crit. text. Holder, Innsbruck, 1887, Wagner. 

Boethius. Text. Peiper, Leipzig, 1871, Teubner; Corpus 
Script. Eccl. Lat. 

Text and translation. Stewart and Rand, 1918, Loeb 
Classical Library. 


APPENDIX I 


289 


Translation. H. R. James, London, 1897, Elliot Stock; 
Fox, in Bohn’s Library; Consolation of Philosophy, W. V. 
Cooper, London, 1902 (Temple Classics). 

Caesar. Text. Kubler, Leipzig, 1893-1897, Teubner, 3 vols.; 
R. du Pontet, Oxford, 1900-1901, Clarendon Press. Text 
and translation (Gallic War). H. J. Edwards, 1917- , 
Loeb Classical Library. 

Translation. W. A. McDevitte, Bohn’s Library (also 
American Book Co.) Text and notes. The Gallic War, 
Allen & Greenough, Boston, Ginn & Co.; The Civil War, 
Perrin, New York, University Publishing Co. Many other 
school editions exist. 

Calpurnius. Text. Poet. Lot. Min., vol. iii; with Nemesianus, 
Text and Latin notes, Schenkl, Leipzig and Prague, 1885. 

Translation (Eclogues, in verse). E. J. L. Scott, Lon¬ 
don, 1890, Bell. 

Capella. See Martianus. 

Cato. De Agricultura. Text and Latin notes, Keil, Leipzig, 
1884-1902, Teubner. [Three vols. with Varro, Res Rus- 
ticae.] 

Other works. Text and Latin notes. Jordan, Leipzig, 
1860, Teubner. Translation (De Agricultura, with 
Varro) by A Virginia Farmer, New York, 1913, Mac¬ 
millan. 

Catonis Disticha. Poet. Lat. Min., vol. iii. 

Catullus. Text. ttaupt-Vahldn, 7th ed., Leipzig, 1912, 
Hirzel; Mueller, Leipzig, 1885, Teubner. [With Tibullus, 
Propertius, the fragments of Laevius, Calvus, Cinna, 
and others, and the Priapea] ; crit. text with appendices, 
R. Ellis, 2d ed., Oxford, 1878. 

Text and translation. C. Stuttaford, London, 1912, Bell; 
Cornish and Post gate, 1912, Loeb Classical Library (with 
Tibullus: and the Pervigilium Veneris). 

Annotated edition. Merrill, Boston, 1893, Ginn & Co. 

Commentary. R. Ellis, 2d ed., Oxford, 1889. 

Translation (verse). Theodore Martin, Edinburgh and 
London, 1875, Blackwood. 

Celsus. Text. Daremberg, Leipzig, 1859, Teubner. 

Translation. J. Grieve, London, 1756. 

Censorinus. Text. Hultsch, Leipzig, 1867, Teubner; crit. 
text, J. Cholodniak, St. Petersburg, 1889. 


290 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


Charisius. Text in Gram. Lat.^vo I. i. 

Cicero. Text. Baiter and Kayser, Leipzig, 1860-’69, B. 
Tauchnitz, 11 vols.; Muller, Klotz, and others, Leipzig, 
Teubner, 10 vols. [Editions of separate works and selec¬ 
tions are numerous.] 

Correspondence arranged according to its chronological 
order, with commentary and introductory essays. R. Y. 
Tyrrell and L. C. Purser, Dublin and London, 1855-1901. 
7 vols [now in a later edition.] 

Text and translation. De Finibus, H. Rackham, De 
Officiis, W. Miller, Letters to Atticus, E. 0. Winstedt, Loeb 
Classical Library. 

Translation. Orations, C. D. Yongd, 4 vols.; On Ora¬ 
tory and Orators, with Letters to Quintus and Brutus, J. S. 
Watson; on the Nature of the Gods, Divination, Fate, 
Laws, a Republic, and Consulship, C. D. Yonge and F. 
Barham; Academics, De Finibus, and Tusculan Questions, 
C. D. Yonge; Offices, or Moral Duties, Cato Major, an 
Essay on Old Age, Lselius, an Essay on Friendship, Scip- 
io’s Dream, Paradoxes, Letters to Quintus on Magistrates, 
C. R. Edmonds; Letters, E. Shuckburgh, 4 vols. Bohn’s 
Library. 

Life. W. Forsyth, London, 1863, Murray; New York, 
Scribner’s. 

Cinctus Alimentus. Text in Hist. Rom. Rell. 

Ciris. Text in Poet. Lat. Min., vol. ii; Nemethy, Budapest, 

1909. See also Virgil. 

Claudian. Text. Koch, Leipzig, 1893, Teubner. 

Translation. Hawkins, London, 1817, 2 vols. 

Columella. Text in Scriptores Rei Rusticae, ed. Schneider, 
Leipzig, 1794~’97; De Arboribus, text, Lundstrom, Upsala, 
1897. 

Translation. Anonymous, London, 1745. 

Commodianus. Text. Ludwig, Leipzig, 1877-’78, 2 vols. 

Teubner; Corp. Script. Eccl. Lat., vol. xv. 

Consolatio AD Liviam. Text in Poet. Lat. Min., vol. i. 
Cornificius (See Cicero ad Herennium). Text. Marx, 
Leipzig, 1894, Teubner. 

Culex. Text in Poet. Lat. Min., vol. ii: C. Plesent, Paris, 

1910, Fontemoing. See Virgil. 

Curtius Rufus. Text. Hedecke, Leipzig, 1908, Teubner. 


APPENDIX I 


291 


Curtius Rufus. Translation. John Digby, 3d ed. corr. by 
Young, London, 1747. 

Cyprian. Text. Hartel, Vienna, 1868—’71, 4 vols. in Corp. 
Script. Eccl. Lat. 

Dares. Text. Meister, Leipzig, 1873, Teubner. 

Dictys. Text. Meister, Leipzig, 1872, Teubner. 

Diomedes. Text in Gram. Lat. 

Dioscorides. Text in Gram. Lat. 

Diile. Text in Poet. Lat. Min., vol. ii. 

Donatus. Text. P. Wessner, Leipzig, 1902- , 09, Teubner; 
H. Georg, Leipzig, 1906, Teubner; Gram. Lat. and in the 
introductions to early editions of Terence. 

Ennius. Text. Vahlen, Leipzig, 1903, Teubner; Fragm. 

Poet. Bom. and Corp. Poet. Lat., vol. i. 

Eutropius. Text. Buhl, Leipzig, 1887, Teubner. 

Translation. See Justin. 

Fenestelua. Text in Hist. Bom. Fragm. 

Festus (Rufius). Text. Wagner, Prague, 1886. 

Festus (Sextus Pompeius). Text. W. M. Lindsay , Leipzig, 
1913, Teubner. 

Firmicus Maternus. Text, Halm, Vienna, 1867, in Corp. 
Script. Eccl. Lat., vol. ii; De Errore Professorum Religion- 
um, K. Ziegler, Leipzig, 1907; Matheseos Libri viii, Kroll 
and Skutsch, Leipzig, 1897-1913, Teubner. 

Florus. Text. Halm, Leipzig, 1854, Teubner. 

Frontinus. Strategemata. Text. Gundermann, Leipzig, 
1888, Teubner. 

Translation. B. Scott, London, 1811. 

De Aquis Urbis Romae. Text. Biicheler, Leipzig, 1858, 
Teubner. 

Text with translation and discussion. C. Herschel, 
Boston, 1899, Dana, Estes & Co. 

Fronto. Text. Naber, Leipzig, 1867, Teubner. 

Text and translation. Correspondence with M. Aurelius 
Antoninus, etc., C. B. Haines, 1919, Loeb Classical Library. 
Gaius. Text with translation and notes. Poste, 3d ed., Ox¬ 
ford, 1890. 

Geulius. Text. Hosius, Leipzig, 1903, Teubner. 

Translation. Beloe, London, 1795, 3 vols. 

Germanicus. Text in Poet. Lat. Min., vol. i; Aratea, A. 
Breisig, Leipzig, 1899, Teubner. 


292 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


Gratius. Text in Poet Lat. Min. } vol. i; Corp. Poet. Lat. f 
part iii. 

Hieronymus. See Jerome. 

Hilarius (St. Hilary). Text. Patrol. Lat., vols. ix and x. 

Hirtius. Text in complete editions of Caesar. 

Horace. Text in Corp. Poet. Lat., vol. i; Kellar and Htiuss- 
ner, 2d ed., Prague, 1892. E. C. Wickham, Oxford, 1901, 
Clarendon Press; W. H. D. Bouse, London, 1905, Blackie 
& Son; text with Conington’s translation, London, 1905, 
Bell. Annotated editions are numerous. 

Translation (verse). Theodore Martin, Edinburgh and 
London, 1881, Blackwood, 2 vols. Odes and Epodes, 
Lord Lytton, Edinburgh and London, 1869, New York, 1870. 

IIyginus. Text. M. Schmidt, Jena, 1872; Astronomica, Chat- 
elain and Legendre, Paris, 1909, H. Champion. 

Hyginus Gromaticus. Text. Domaszewski, Leipzig, 1887. 

Jerome. Text. Patrol. Lat., vols. xxii-xxx; Corpus. Script. 
Eccl. Lat. De Viris Illustribus, Herding, Leipzig, 1879, 
Teubner; Richardson, Leipzig, 1896, Gebhardt. 

Julius. See Caesar. 

Julius Caesar Strabo. Text in Orat. Bom. Fragm. 

Julius Victor. Text in Orelli’s Cicero, vol. v, p. 195, and 
in Halm’s Rhetores Minores, p. 371. 

Justin. Text. Jeep, Leipzig, 1859, Teubner; Pessonneaux, 
Paris, 1903 [with French notes]. 

Translation. Watson, London, 1853, Bohn’s Library, 
[with Cornelius Nepos and Eutropius]. 

Juvenal. Text. Jahn-Bucheler-Leo, Berlin, 1910, Weid- 
mann [with Persius and Sulpicia] ; S. G. Owen, Oxford, 
1903 [with Persius]. 

Annotated edition. Pearson & Strong, Oxford, 1892. 

Text and translation. G. G. Ramsay, 1918, Loeb Classical 
Library. 

Translation. (Prose) Leeper, London, 1891, 2d ed., Mac¬ 
millan [see also Lucilius] ; S. G. Owen, London, 1903; 
(verse) Dry den, in Dry den’s works. 

Laotantius. Text. Patrol. Lat., vols. vi and vii. [Some of 
his works have appeared in Corp. Script. Eccl. Lat. The 
Poem on the Phoenix is in Poet. Lat. Min., vol. ii.] 

Translation. W. Fletcher, Edinburgh, 1871, Ante-Nicene 

Christian Library, vols. xxi, xxii. 


APPENDIX I 


293 


Lampridius. Text in Scriptores Historiae Augustae. 

Livius Andronicus. Text in Fragm. Poet. Rom. and Scaen. 
Rom. Poesis Fragm., vols., i and ii. 

Livy. Text. Conway and Walters, Oxford, 1914-’19, Claren¬ 
don Press. 

Crit. Text. Madvig and Us sing, Copenhagen, 4th ed. 
1886 and later. 4 vols. 

Text and translation. B. 0. Foster, 1919- , Loeb Class¬ 
ical Library. 

Translation. Spillan, Edmunds, and McDevitte, Lon¬ 
don, Bohn’s Library. 4 vols. 

Lucan. Text in Corp. Poet. Lat., part iii; Hosius, Leipzig, 
3d ed. 1913, Teubner. 

Translation (verse) E. Ridley, London, 1896; (prose) 
H. T. Riley, London, 1803, Bohn’s Library. 

Lucilius. Text. F. Marx, Leipzig, 1904-’05, Teubner; 
Fragm. Poet. Rom. 

Translation. Evans, London, Bohn’s Library. [Ju¬ 
venal, Persius, Sulpicia, and Lucilius.] 

Lucretius. Text. Munro, London, Bell; also in Harper’s 
Classical Texts. 

Crit. Text. Lachmann, Berlin, 1866. 2 vols.; W. A. 
Merrill, Berkeley, Cal., 1917. 

Text and notes. Munro, London, 5th ed. 1905-’10, 
Bell. 3 vols., the third of which is a prose translation, 
also published separately, 1908. 

Translation. (Prose) Munro, see above; C. Bailey, Ox¬ 
ford, 1910, Clarendon Press; (verse) W. E. Leonard, Lon¬ 
don, 1916, Dent (New York, Dutton); Sir R. Allison, 
London, 1919, Humphreys. 

Lygdamus. Text. G. Neme'thy, Budapest, 1906. 

Macrobius. Text. Eyssenhardt, Leipzig, 1868, 2d ed. Teub¬ 
ner series. 

Maecenas. Text in Fragm. Poet. Rom. 

Manilius. Text in Corp. Poet. Lat., part iii; Breiter, Leipzig, 
1907-08, Dietrich. 

Translation. Creech, London, 1700. [Appended to Lu¬ 
cretius.] 

Manlius. See Vopiscus. 

Marcellinus. See Ammianus. 


294 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


Marius Victorinus. Text in Gram. Lat., vol. vi, Orelli’s 
Cicero, vol. v, Halm's Rhetores Minores, and Patrol. 
Lat., vol. viii. 

Martial. Text. W. M. Lindsay, Oxford, 1902, Clarendon 
Press. 

Text and translation. W. C. Kerr , 1919- , Loeb Class¬ 
ical Library. 

Translation (prose). Edited by H. G. Bohn, London, 
1897. [Contains also metrical translations from various 
sources.] 

Martianus Capella. Text. Eyssenhardt, Leipzig, 1866, 
Teubner. 

Mela. Text. Frick, Leipzig, 1880, Teubner. 

Minucius Felix. Text. Waltzing, Leipzig, 1912, Teubner. 

Translation. J. H. Freeze, London, 1919, Society for 

promoting Christian Knowledge. 

Moretum. Text in Podt. Lat. Min., vol. ii. 

N^evius. Text in Fragm. Poet. Rom., Scaen. Rom. Poesis 
Fragm., vols. i and ii. 

Namatianus. See Rutilius. 

Nemesianus. Text in Poet. Lat. Min., vol. iii; C . H. Keene , 
London, 1887 [with Calpurnius.] 

Nepos. Text. Halm^Fleckeisen, Leipzig, Teubner; W in - 
stedt, Oxford, 1904; Nipperdey, Berlin, 1913, Weid- 
mann. 

Translation. See Justin. 

Nigidius Figulus. Text of fragments with Latin notes. 
Stroboda, Vienna, 1889. 

Nonius Marcellus. Crit. text with comment. Muller, 
Leipzig, 1888, Teubner, 2 vols.; Lindsay, Leipzig, 1903. 

Octavius. See Augustus. 

Orosius. Zangemeister, Corp. Script. Eccl. Lat., vol. v, and 
Leipzig, 1889, Teubner. 

Ovid. Text in Corp. Poet. Lat., vol. i; Merkel-Ewald, Leip¬ 
zig, Teubner. 

Annotated editions of separate works and of selections 
are numerous. 

Text and translation. G. Showerman (Heroides and 
Amores), F. J. Miller (Metamorphoses), Loeb Classical 
Library. 


APPENDIX I 


295 


Translation (prose). Bohn’s Library. Metrical trans¬ 
lations by Dry den and others are contained in Chalmers’ 
English Poets. 

Pacuvius. Text in Scaen. Rom. Poesis Fragm., vol. i. 

Palladius. Text in Scriptores Rei Rusticae, ed. Schneider, 
Jena, 1794-’97. 

Persius. Text in Corp. Poet. Lat., vol. i; Jahn-Biicheler-Leo, 
and S. G. Owen; see Juvenal; with translation and com¬ 
mentary, Conington and Nettleship, Oxford, 1893; with 
translation, G. G. Ramsay. See Juvenal. 

Translation (prose). See Lucilius and Juvenal; 
(verse) Dry den, in his complete works and Chalmers’ Eng¬ 
lish Poets. 

Pervigilium Veneris. Text in Poet. Lat. Min., vol. iv; J. W. 
Mackail, Oxford, 1911, Clarendon Press. 

Text and translation. J. W. Mackail, 1912, Loeb Classi¬ 
cal Library (with Catullus and Tibullus). 

Petronius. Text. BuchelCr-Heraeus, 5th ed., 1912, Berlin, 
Weidmann (with satires of Seneca and Varro). 

Text and translation. W. D. Lowe, London, 1905, Bell 
(Cena Trimalchionis); M. Heseltine, 1913, Loeb Classical 
Library (with Seneca, Apocolocyntosis). 

Translation. (Trimalchio’s Dinner). H. T. Peck, New 
York, 1898, Harper’s. 

Ph^edrus. Text in Corp. Poet. Lat., part iii; Riese, Leipzig, 
1885, B. Tauchnitz; Postgate, Oxford, 1919, Clarendon 
Press. 

Translation. Smart, London, 1831. [Also appended 
to Riley’s version of Terence and Phaedrus in Bohn’s 
Library.] 

Plautus. Text. Goetz and Schoell, Leipzig, 1902- , Teub- 
ner; Lindsay, Oxford, 1905, Clarendon Press. 

Critical edition. Ritschl (2nd ed. by Goetz, Loewe, and 
Schoell), Leipzig, 1878- 93, Teubner, 20 parts. 

Many annotated editions of separate plays exist. 

Text and translation. P. Nixon, Loeb Classical Library, 
not yet (1922) complete. 

Translation (prose). Riley, London, Bohn’s Library; 
(verse) Thornton and Warner, London, 1767-’72. 

Pliny the Elder. Text. Jan and Mayhoff, Leipzig, Teub¬ 
ner. 6 vols. 


296 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


Translation. With Notes, Bostock and Biley, London, 
Bell. 6 vols. 

Pliny the Younger. Text. Kukula, Leipzig, 1912, Teubner. 

Text and translation. Melmoth (rev. by Hutchinson ), 
Loeb Classical Library. 

Translation. Melmoth, revised by Bosanquet, London, 
1877, Bell, and (with Cicero, letters and treatises on 
Friendship and Old Age, by E. S. Schuckburgh) , New 
York, 1919, P. F. Collins & Son; Lewis, London, 1879, 
Triibner. 

Plotius. See Sacerdos. 

Pompeius Trogus. See Justin. 

Pomponius. See Meua. 

Pomponius (Lucius). Text in Fragm. Poet. Bom. 

Priapea. Text in Poet. Lat. Min., vol. i, cf. vol. ii. 

Priscian. Text in Gram. Lat., vols. ii and iii. 

Probus (Valerius). Text in Gram. Lat., vol. iv. 

Propertius. Text in Corp. Poet. Lat., vol. i; Hosius, Leipzig, 
1911, Teubner; Phillemore, Oxford, 1901, Clarendon Press. 
See Catullus. 

Ed. Crit. Postgate, London, 1880, Bell. 

Text and translation. H. E. Butler, 1912, Loeb Classical 
Library. 

Translation (prose). Gantillon, with metrical versions 
of select elegies by Nott and Elton, London, Bohn’s 
Library; Phillemore, Oxford, 1906, Clarendon Press. 

Prudentius. Text. Patrol. Lat., vols. lix and lx. 

Publilius Syrus. Text. Bickford-Smith, Cambridge, 1885; 
0. Friedrich, Berlin, 1880, Grieben [with notes]. 

Quintilian. Text. Institutiones Oratoriae, Bademacher, 
Leipzig, 1907- . Text and translation. H. E. Butts, 
1921, Loeb Classical Library. 

Declamationes. Lehnert, Leipzig, 1905, Teubner. 

Translation. Institutes of Oratory, J. S. Watson, Lon¬ 
don, Bohn’s Library. 2 vols. 

Reposianus. Text in Poet. Lat. Min., vol. iv. 

Rutilius Namatianus. Text in Poet. Lat. Min., vol. v; 
V. Ussani, Florence, 1921. Text with translation (by G. F. 
Savage-Armstrong) and critical apparatus, C. H. Keene, 
London, 1907. 

Sacerdos. Text in Gram. Lat., vol. vi. 


APPENDIX I 


297 


Sallust. Text. Ahling, Leipzig, 1919, Teubner. [School 
editions of the Catiline and the Jugurtha are numerous.] 

Text and translation. Rolfe, 1921, Loeb Classical Li¬ 
brary. 

Translation. Pollard, London, 1882, Macmillan. 

Sammonicus Serenus. Text in Poet. Lat. Min., vol. iii. 

Sedulius. Text in Patrol. Lat., vol. ix, and Corp. Script. 
Eccl. Lat., vol. x. 

Seneca (the father). Text. Muller, Leipzig, 1888, Frey tag; 
Kiessling, Leipzig, 1872, Teubner. 

Seneca (the son). Text. Philosophical works. Haase and 
others, Leipzig, 1905-’14, Teubner. 

Tragedies, Peiper and Richter, Leipzig, 1902, Teubner. 

Text and translation, F. J. Miller, 1917, Loeb Classical 
Library; Natural Questions, Geikie, London, 1910, Mac¬ 
millan. Tragedies, W. Bradshaw, London, 1902, Sonnen- 
schein; Miller, Chicago, 1907, Chicago University Press. 
Apocolocyntosis, Rouse, Loeb Classical Library. See 
Petronius. 

Translation. On Benefits, Minor Essays, and On 
Clemency. A. Stewart, London, Bohn’s Library, 
2 vols. 

Servius. Text with Latin notes. Thilo and Hagen, 1878- 
1902, Teubner. 4 vols. 

Silius Italicus. Text. Bauer, Leipzig, 1890-’92, Teubner, 
2 vols. 

Translation (verse). Tytler, Calcutta, 1828. 2 vols. 

Sisenna. Text in Hist. Rom. Rell. 

Solinus. Crit. Text. Mommsen, Berlin, 2d ed., 1895, Weid- 
mann. 

Statius. Text. Kohlmann-Klotz, Leipzig, Teubner. 2 
vols.; Silvae, A. Klotz, Leipzig, 1912, Teubner; Phille- 
more, Oxford, 1905, Clarendon Press. 

Translation (verse). Thebaid. Lewis, in Chalmers’ 
English Poets, vol. xx; Coleridge, in his collected poems; 
Thebaid and Achilleis, Garrod, Oxford, 1906, Clarendon 
Press; Achilleis, Sir Robert Howard, in his poems; Silvae, 
Slater, Oxford, 1908, Clarendon Press. 

Sueius. Text in Fragm. Poet. Rom. and in Muller’s Lucilius. 

Suetonius. Text. Him, Leipzig, 1907~’08, Teubner. 


298 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


Text and translation. J. C. Rolfe, 1914, Loeb Classical 
Library. 

Translation. Thomson, revised by Forester, in Bohn’s 
Library. 

Sulpicia. See Juvenal. 

Symmachus. Text. Seech, Berlin, 1883 ( Monum. Germ. Hist. 
Auct. Antiquiss., vol. vi, 1). 

Tacitus. Text. J. Muller, Leipzig- and Vienna, 1906; H. 
Furneaux and C. D. Fisher, Oxford, 1900-07, Clarendon 
Press; Halm-Andresen, 1907-’13, Teubner. Many editions 
of separate works exist. 

Text and translation. Peterson, 1914, Loeb Classical 
Library (Dialogus, Agricola, Germania). 

Translation. Church and Brodribb, London, Macmillan, 
new edition, 1905-’06; W. H. Fyffe, Oxford, 1908, (Dia¬ 
logus, Agricola, and Germania) and 1912 (Histories), 
Clarendon Press; G. G. Ramsay, London, 1904-’09 (An¬ 
nals) and 1915 (Histories), J. Murray. 

Terence. Text. R. Y. Tyrrell, Oxford, 1902, Clarendon 
Press. Crit. ed., Umpfenbach, Leipzig, 1871, Teubner. 
Annotated ed., Wagner, London, 1869, Bell; Ashmore, New 
York, 2d ed., 1910, Oxford University Press American 
Branch. Annotated editions of separate plays are numer¬ 
ous. 

Text and translation. J. Sargeaunt, 1912, Loeb Class¬ 
ical Library. 

Translation (verse). Colman, London, 1810; (prose) 
Riley, in Bohn’s Library [with Piledrus]. 

Terentianus Maurus. Text in Gram. Lat., vol. vi. 

Tertullian. Text. Patrol. Lat., vols. i and ii; Reiffer- 
scheid and Wissowa, Corp. Script. Feel. Lat., vol. xx. 

Translation. P. Holmes, Edinburgh, 1869-70, Ante- 
Nicene Christian Library, vols. xi, xv, xviii (with Victo- 
rinus and Commodianus). 

Tibullus. Text in Corp. Poet. Lat., vol. i; Postgate, Oxford, 
1915, Clarendon Press; see also Catullus. 

Text and translation. Postgate, 1912, Loeb Classical 
Library. 

Translation. Cranstoun, Edinburgh and London, 1872, 
Blackwood. [English verse with notes.] 

Trogus. See Justin. 


APPENDIX I 


299 


Valerius Flaccus. Text. Kramer, Leipzig, 1913, Teubner. 
Varius. Text in Fragm,. Poet. Bom. 

Varro Atacinus. Text in Fragm. Poet. Bom. 

Vaero (Marcus). Text. DeLingua Latina, Muller, Leipzig, 
1833; Spengel, Berlin, 1885. De Re Rustica, Goetz, Leipzig, 
1912, Teubner. Fragments of Varro’s Menippean Satires 
are «ontained in Biicheler’s Petronius, of the lost gram¬ 
matical works in Wilmanns, De Varronis Libris Gram- 
maticis, Berlin, 1864, Weidmann, of the Antiquitates in 
MerakeVs edition of Ovid’s Fasti, Berlin, 1841, and poetical 
fragments in Fragm. Poet. Bom. 

Translation. On Farming. Lloyd Stow-Best, London, 

1912, Bell ; A Virginia Farmer ( F. Harrison ), New York, 

1913, Macmillan. 

Vegetius Renatus. Text. Epitoma Rei Militaris, Lang, 
Leipzig, 2d ed. 1885, Teubner. 

Mulomedicina. Lomatzsch., Leipzig, 1903, Teubner. 
Velleius Paterculus. Text. Halm, Leipzig, 1876, Teubner; 
B. Ellis, Oxford, 1898. 

Translation. J. S. Watson, Bohn’s and Harper’s Li¬ 
braries [Sallust, Florus, and Velleius Paterculus, 
with notes]. 

Virgil. Text. Bibbeck-Farrell, Leipzig, 1920, Teubner; 

Nettleship and Postgate, London, 1912, Macmillan; Hirzel, 
Oxford, 1900, Clarendon Press. 

Text of Appendix Vergiliana (Culex, Dirae, etc.). B. 
Ellis, Oxford, Clarendon Press. 

Annotated editions. Conington and Nettleship, London, 
Bell (several editions); Greenough, Boston, Ginn & Co. 
(several editions). School editions of parts of Virgil’s 
works are many. 

Text and translation. Fairclough, 1916- , Loeb Class¬ 
ical Library; Mooney , Birmingham, 1916 (the lesser 
poems, Culex, Dirae, Lydia, etc.). 

Translation. Dryden, in his complete works. 

JEneid. Conington, London, 1870, Longmans; J. D . 
Long, Boston, 1879, Lockwood, Brooks & Co.; A. S. Way, 
London, 1916, Macmillan; J . W. Mackail, London, 1908, 
Macmillan. 

Eclogues. C. S. Calverley, in his collected works, Lon¬ 
don, 1901, Bell. 


300 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


Georgies. H. W. Preston, Boston, 1881, Osgood & Co. 
Biography. Vergil, a Biography, by Tenney Frank, 
New York, 1922, Henry Holt & Co. 

Vitruvius. Text. Krohn, Leipzig, 1912, Teubner. 

Translation. M. H. Morgan, Cambridge, Mass., 1914, 
Harvard University Press. 

Volcacius Sedigitus. Text in Fragm. Poet. Rom. 

Vopiscus. Text in Script. Hist. Aug. 


APPENDIX II 

CHRONOLOGICAL TABLE 


[When two dates are given they designate the birth and death of the 
author or authors named in the same line. The dates given opposite the 
names of emperors, which are printed in italics, refer, however, to their 
reigns, not to their lives. When one date is given it designates a time when 
the activity of the author or authors was probably at its height. Interroga¬ 
tion points denote uncertainty.] 


B. C. 

280. 

Before 270-about 204. 
About 269-199. 

About 254-184. 
239-169. 

234-149. 

About 230. 


220-about 130. 
216. 

211 . 

210 . 

206. 


Before 200-about 165. 
198. 

(f)—196. 

About 192-152. 

191. 

About 190-159. 
185-129. 

183. 

(?)—183. 


About 180. 

180 (?)-126. IbS) 
(?)-174. 

170-at least 100. 
163-133. 

About 158-about 75. 
154-121. 

About 154-after 100. 
About 152-87, 


Appius Claudius Caecus (orator). 

Livius Andronicus. 

Gnaeus Naevius. 

Titus Maccius Plautus. 

Quintus Ennius. 

Marcus Porcius Cato. 

Quintus Fabius Maximus Cunctator (or¬ 
ator). 

Marcus Pacuvius. 

Quintus Fabius Pictor. 

Fabulae Atellanae introduced. 

Lucius Cincius Alimentus. 

Quintus Caecilius Metellus (orator). 

Statius Caecilius (comic poet). 

Sextus iElius (jurist). 

Marcus Cornelius Cethegus (orator). 
Cato’s son (jurist). 

Scipio Nasica (jurist). 

Publius Terentius Afer (Terence). 

Scipio Africanus the younger. 

Quintus Fabius Labeo (jurist). 

Publius Licinius Crassus (orator), Scipio 
Africanus the elder. 

Lucius Acilius (jurist). 

Gaius Lucilius. 

Publius iElius (jurist). 

Lucius Accius. 

Tiberius Gracchus (orator). 

Publius Rutilius Rufus. 

Gaius Gracchus (orator). 

Lucius iEiiiis Praeconinus Stilo. 

Quintus Lutatius Catulus. 

301 




302 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


B. c. 

About 150. 


143-87. 

About 140. 

140-91. 

136. 

133. 

131. 

About 130. 

122 . 

119-67. 

116-27. 

114-50. 

109-32. 

106-43. 

105-43. 

(f)—103. 

102 (?)-44. 

102-43. 

Latter part of the second 
century. 

Before 100-after 30. 

About 99-55 (?). 

(?)-at least 91. 

About 90. 

(?)—87. 

87-47. 

86-35. 

Early in the first century. 
First half of the first cen¬ 
tury. 


About 84-about 54. 
(f)-at least 82. 

82-after 37. 

78 (!)-42. 

(?)-77. 

70-27. 

70 (f)-8. 

70-19. 

About 70-after 16. 

67-5 a. d. 

65-8. 

About 64-about 17 a. d. 


Lucius Afranius, Titinius (comic poets), 
Publius Cornelius Scipio, Aulus Postu- 
mius Albinus, Gaius Acilius. 

Marcus Antonius (orator). 

Lucius Cassius Hemina, Gaius Laelius. 
Lucius Licinius Crassus (orator). 

Lucius Furius Philus (orator and jurist). 
Publius Mucius Scaevola, Lucius Calpur- 
nius Piso Frugi. 

Publius Licinius Crassus Mucianus (ju¬ 
rist). 

Gaius Titius. 

Gaius Fannius (orator and historian). 
Lucius Cornelius Sisenna. 

Marcus Terentius Varro. 

Hortensius (orator). 

Titus Pomponius Atticus. 

Marcus Tullius Cicero. 

Decimus Laberius. 

Turpilius (comic poet). 

Gaius Julius Caesar. 

Quintus Cicero. 

Gnaeus Mathis, Laevius Melissus, Hostius, 
Aulus Furius, Ccelius Antipater, Quin¬ 
tus Valerius Soranus. 

Cornelius Nepos. 

Titus Lucretius Carus. 

Sempronius Asellio (historian). 

Quintus Mucius Scaevola (jurist). 

Lucius Pomponius, Novius (writers of Fab- 
ulce Atellance), Volcacius Sedigitus. 
Gaius Julius Caesar Strabo (tragedian). 
Gaius Licinius Calvus. 

Gaius Sallustius Crispus. 

Valerius Antias, Quintus Cornificius. 
Sueius, Gaius Helvius Cinna, Publius 
Valerius Cato, Gaius Memmius, Ticidas, 
Aurelius Opilius, Antonius Gnipho, 
Marcus Pompilius Andronicus, Santra, 
Servius Sulpicius Rufus. 

Gaius Valerius Catullus. 

Quintus Claudius Quadrigarius (historian). 
Varro Atacinus. 

Marcus Junius Brutus. 

Titus Quinctius Atta. 

Cornelius Gallus. 

Gaius Maecenas. 

Publius Vergilius Maro (Virgil). 

Vitruvius Pollio. 

Gaius Asinius Pollio. 

Quintus Horatius Flaccus (Horace). 

Gaius Julius Hyginus. 




APPENDIX II 


303 


B. C. 

64-8 a. d. 

63-14 a. d. 

63-12 a. d. 

59-17 a. d. 

About 55-about 40 a. d. 
About 54-about 19. 

About 54-about 4. 

52-19 a. d. 

About 50. 

About 50-about 15. 

C?)-47. 

47-about 30 a. d. 

(?)—45. 

(0-after 44. 

(0-43. 

(?)-after 43. 

43—(f). 

43-18 a. d. 

40—33 a. d. 

About 20. 

15-19 A. D. 

14-59 a.d. 

12 . 

Second half of the first 
century. 


Marcus Valerius Messalla. 

Gaius Octavius (Caesar Octavianus Au¬ 
gustus). 

Marcus Vipsanius Agrippa. 

Titus Livius (Livy). 

Seneca (the father). 

Albius Tibullus. 

Domitius Marsus. 

Decimus Fenestella. 

Publilius Syrus (writer of mimes). 

Sextus Propertius. 

Marcus Calidius. 

Decimus Valerius Maximus. 

Nigidius Figulus. 

Gaius Oppius. 

Aulus Hirtius. 

Marcus Tullius Tiro. 

Lygdamus. 

Publius Ovidius Naso (Ovid). 

Asinius Gallus. 

Pompeius Trogus. 

Claudius Caesar Germanicus. 

Domitius Afer. 

Gaius Valgius Rufus. 

Sulpicia, Albinovanus Pedo, Ponticus, 
Macer, Grattius, Rabirius, Cornelius 
Severus, Gaius Melissus, the Priapea , 
the Consolatio ad Liviam, Titus Labie- 
nus, Marcus Porcius Latro, Gaius Al- 
bucius Silus, Quintus Haterius, Lucius 
Junius Gallio, Arellius Fuscus, Lucius 
Cestius Pius, Marcus Antistius Labeo, 
Gaius Ateius Capito. 


A. D. 

First half of the first cen¬ 
tury. 


About 1. 
About 1-65. 
About 3-88. 
14-37. 

About 15-80. 
16-59. 

23-79. 

(?)-25. 

25-101. 

(?)-27. 

30. 


Manilius, the JEtna, Aufidius Bassus, 
Quintus Remmius Palaemon, Caepio, An¬ 
tonins Castor, Julius Atticus, Lucius 
Gracchinus, Marcus Apicius, Lucius 
Annaeus Cornutus, the Sextii, Gaius 
Musonius Rufus. 

Verrius Flaccus. 

Lucius Annaeus Seneca (the son), 

Asconius Pedianus. 

Tiberius. 

The father of Statius. 

Agrippina. 

Gaius PI in ius Secundus (Pliny the elder). 

Cremutius Cordus. 

Silius Italicus. 

Votienus Montanus. 

Velleius Paterculus. 




304 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


A. D. 

(f)-31. 

(0-32. 

(?)-34. 

34-62. 

About 35-about 100. 
About 35. 

37-41. 

39-65. 

About 40. 

About 40-about 95. 

About 40-about 104. 
41-54. 

About 45. 

About 50. 

54-68. 

About 55-about 118. 

55 (?)-about 135. 

56 

About 60. 

61 or 62-112 or 113. 

( 0 - 66 . 

(0-67. 

69-79. 

About 70. 

About 70 or 75 to about 
150. 

79-81. 

81-96. 

(0-about 90. 

96-98. 

Time of Nerva and Tra¬ 
jan. 

98-117. 

About 100-175. 

About 110-180. 

117-138. 

Time of Hadrian. 


About 125-(0- 
About 125-about 200. 
138-161. 

Time of Antoninus. 

Time of Antoninus and 
M. Aurelius. 

About 160. 

About 160-about 230. 


Publius Vitellius. 

Cassius Severus. 

Mamercus Scaurus. 

Aulus Persius Flaccus (Persius). 

Marcus Fabius Quintilianus (Quintilian). 
Aulus Cornelius Celsus. 

Caligula. 

Marcus Annaeus Lucanus (Lucan). 
Phaedrus, Columella, Pomponius Mela. 
Publius Papinius Statius. 

Marcus Valerius Martialis (Martial). 
Claudius. 

Gaius Cassius Longinus, Proculus. 
Pomponius Secundus, Quintus Curtius 
Rufus, Suetonius Paulinus. 

Nero. 

Cornelius Tacitus. 

Decimus Junius Juvenalis (Juvenal). 
Marcus Valerius Probus. 

Titus Calpurnius Siculus. 

Gaius Plinius Caecilius Secundus (Pliny 
the younger). 

Petronius Arbiter. 

Gnaeus Domitius Corbulo. 

Vespasian. 

Saleius Bassus, Curiatius Maternus, Sex¬ 
tus Julius Frontinus. 

Gaius Suetonius Tranquillus. 

Titus. 

Domitian. 

Gaius Valerius Flaccus. 

Nerva. 

Hyginus, Balbus, Siculus Flaccus, several 
grammarians, etc. 

Trajan. 

Marcus Cornelius Fronto. 

Gaius. 

Hadrian. 

Lucius Annaeus (?) Florus, Marcus Juni- 
anus Justinus (Justin), Salvius Julianus, 
Quintus Terentius Scaurus. 

Aulus Gellius. 

Apuleius. 

Antoninus Pius. 

Granius Licinianus, Lucius Ampelius, Sex¬ 
tus Pomponius. 

Quintus Cervidius Scaevola. 

Marcus Minucius Felix. 

Quintus Septimius Florens Tertullianus 
(Tertullian). 



APPENDIX II 


305 


A. D. 

161-180. 

About 165—230. 

180-192. 

(?)- 212 . 

Before 200. 

193-211. 

Second or third century. 
About 200. 

Early in the third century. 
Third century. 


About 200-258. 

222-235. 

(0-228. 

238. 

238. 

249. 

About 250. 

260-268. 

270-275. 

275. 

283. 

284-305. 

Time of Diocletian. 

About 290. 

297. 

Latter part of the third 
century. 

End of the third century. 
About 300. 

Early part of the fourth 
century. 

Fourth century. 

About 310-about' 395. 
About 315-367. 

321 

About 330. 

330- 400. 

331- 420. 

About 340-397. 

About 345-405. 

348 to about 410. 

About 350. 

354 (f). 

354. 

354-430. 


Marcus Aurelius. 

Marius Maximus. 

Commodus. 

-ZEmilius Papinianus. 

Terentianus Maurus, Juba. 

Septimius Severus. 

The Pervigilium Veneris. 

Helenius Aero, Pomponius Porphyrio, 
Quintus Sammonicus Serenus. 

Hosidius Greta, Gaius Julius Romanus, 
Julius Paulus. 

The Disticha Catonis, Cornelius Labeo, 
Quintus Gargilius Martialis, Aquila Ro- 
manus, Gaius Julius Solinus. 

St. Cyprian (Thascius Caecilius Cyprianus). 
Alexander Severus. 

Domitius Ulpianus. 

Oordian I. 

Censorinus. 

Commodianus. 
iElius Julius Cordus. 

Gallienus. 

Aurelian. 

Tacitus. 

Marcus Aurelius Olympius Nemesianus. 
Diocletian. 

iElius Spartianus, Julius Capitolinus, Vul- 
cacius Gallicanus, Trebellius Pollio. 
Arnobius. 

Eumenius (panegyrist). 

Vespa, Marius Plotius Sacerdos. 

iElius Festus Aphthonius. 

Lactantius Firmianus, Reposianus, Gre- 
gorianus. 

iElius Lampridius, Flavius Vopiscus, No¬ 
nius, Macrobius, Optatianus, Juvencus. 
Itineraries, Peutinger Tablet. 

Ausonius. 

St. Hilary. 

Nazarius (panegyrist). 

Hermogenianus. 

Ammianus Marcellinus. 

St. Jerome. 

St. Ambrose. 

Symmachus. 

Prudentius. 

Marius Victorinus, H31ius Donatus, Cha- 
risius, Diomedes, Palladius. 

Firmicus Maternus. 

The Notitia. 

St. Augustine. 




306 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


A. D. 

About 360. 

360. 

362. 

365. 

Second half of fourth cen¬ 
tury. 

Latter part of the fourth 
century. 

369. 

370. 

About 370. 

389. 

About 400. 

Julius Obsequens. 

Aurelius Victor. 

Mamertinus (panegyrist). 

Eutropius. 

Dictys Cretensis (L. Septimius). 

Servius. 

Rufius Festus. 

(Rufius Festus) Avienus. 

The Querolus. 

Drepanius (panegyrist). 

Claudian (Claudius Claudianus), Marti- 
anus Capella, Vegetius, Avianus. 

Early in the fifth century. 
Fifth century. 

416. 

417. 

438. 

About 450. 

End of the fifth century. 
About 500. 

529. 

533. 

Sulpicius Sereniis. 

Dares. 

Namatianus. 

Orosius. 

Codex Theodosianus. 

Sedulius. 

Dracontius. 

Priscian. 

Code of Justinian. 

Pandects and Institutes. 


~D 




INDEX 


[This index contains the names of all Latin authors mentioned in this book, 
and in addition the names of some historical personages. Reference is also 
made to a number of special topics. When several references are given, the 
chief reference to any author stands first. The titles of works are in Italics.] 


Accius (Lucius), 12; 13; 32; 43; 53; 
236. 

Acilius (Gaius), 33; (Lucius), 37. 

Aero (Helvius), grammarian, 234. 
JElius Aristides, Greek sophist, 240. 
iElius Julius Cordus, 255. 

JElius (P.), jurist, 37; (Sextus), jurist, 
37. 

JSsop, 172; 276. 
iEsopus, actor, 66. 

.z Etna , ascribed to Virgil, 141; 181; 
188. 

Afranius, comic poet, 29; 43. 

African school of literature, 248; 257. 
Agrippa (M. Vipsanius), 99. 
Agrippina, 191; 177; 178. 
Albinovanus Pedo, 137. 

Albucius Silus (C.), 165. 

Alcaeus, 114; 121. 

Alexander Severus, emperor, 229. 
Alexandrian literature, 48; 57; 58; 60; 

62; 64; 121; 129; 136; 274; 281. 
Ambrose (St.), 266 f.; 258 ; 268. 
Ammianus Marcellinus, 263 f. 
Ampelius (L.), 232. 

Anacreon, 114; 121. 

Anastasius, emperor, 261. 

Anaxagoras, Greek philosopher, 51. 
Andronicus (L. Livius), 5; 6; 12; 14; 
17; 18; 32; 33; 115; 273; 281. 


Andronicus (M. Pompilius). See 
Pompilius. 

Antimachus, 199. 

Antiochus, Academic philosopher, 66. 
Antonines, 227 ; 235. 

Antoninus Pius, emperor, 227; 232; 
233; 235. 

Antonius Castor, 176. 

Antonius (M.), orator, 45; 66; 70. 
Antonius (M.), triumvir, 68; 71; 82; 
93; 99; 131. 

Aphthonius (iElius Festus), 256. 
Apollodorus, Greek comic poet, 25; 

26 ; Greek rhetorician, 135. 
Apollonius of Rhodes, 63; 107 ; 152; 
196. 

Appius Claudius Caecus, 5. 

Apuleius, 237-240; 241; 243; 246; 
248. 

Aquila Romanus, 256. 

Aquilius, comic poet, 23. 

Aratus, Greek poet on astronomy, 70; 
173; 270. 

Archias, poet, 66; 70; 75. 
Archilochus, Greek poet, 119; 120. 
Arellius Fuscus, 143; 165. 

Aristotle, 279; 280. 

Arnobius, 250. 

Arria, wife of Paetus, 184; 203, 
Arulenus Rusticus, Stoic, 213. 

307 




308 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


Asconius Pedianus (Q.), 192. 

Asellio (Sempronius), 39; 43. 

Atellan plays, 30. 

Atilius, comic poet, 23. 

Atta, 29 ; 138. 

Attalus, Stoic, 177. 

Atticus (Julius), 176. 

Atticus (T. Pomponius), 94 f.; 79; 80; 
91; 92. 

Augustine (St.), 268 f.; 78; 248; 252; 
258. 

Augustus, 98; 14; 97; 99 ; 100 ; 101; 
102; 103; 104; 105; 106; 107; 111; 
116; 125; 126; 127; 129; 131; 135; 
138; 142; 144; 147; 148; 149; 153; 
154; 155; 157; 163; 165; 168*; 169; 
170; 171; 172; 173 ; 174; 176 ; 177; 
183; 216 ; 231; 261; 282. 

Aurelian, emperor, 229. 

Aurelius Victor, 261. 

Ausonius, 270-272 ; 258; 273. 

Avianus, 276. 

Avienus, 270. 

Bacchylides, Greek poet, 121. 

Balbus, writer on geometry, 225. 
Bassus (Aufidius), historian, 176; 205. 
Bassus, poet, 138; 143. 

Bassus (Csesius), poet, 184. 

Bassus (Saleius), poet, 201. 

Boethius, 278-280; 258; 281. 

Brutus (M. Junius), 95; 116; 176 ; 
186. 

Burrus (Afranius), 178. 

Ceecilius (Q.-Metellus), 36. 

Caecilius (Statius), 23; 18. 

Caesar (C. Julius), 83-87; 47; 56; 57; 
67 ; 68; 71; 73; 81; 82,88; 89; 93 ; 
95; 96; 97; 99 ; 105; 111; 116 ; 128; 
153; 157; 160; 163; 165; 168; 174; 
186 ; 215; 281; 283. 

Caesars, Twelve, lives by Suetonius, 
230. 

Calidius (M.), 95. 

Caligula, 170; 166; 172; 173; 176; 

177; 216. 


Callimachus, Alexandrian poet, 59; 
135; 136 ; 149. 

Calpurnius Piso Frugi (L.), 37; 39. 
Calpurnius Siculus (T.), 187 f.; 254. 
Calvus (Gaius Licinius), 62; 95. 
Cantica, 16. 

Capella (Martianus), 260. 

Capito (C. Ateius), 167 ; 192. 
Capitolinus (Julius), 255. 

Caracalla, emperor, 233; 247. 

Carlyle, compared with Tacitus, 217. 
Carneades, Academic philosopher, 49. 
Cassius Longinus (C.), jurist, 192. 
Cassius Severus, 165. 

Castor (Antonius), 176. 

Catiline, 47; 67 ; 89 ; 90. 

Cato (M. Porcius), 34r-36; 8; 45; 90; 

92; 192; 207 ; 236; his son, 37. 

Cato (P. Valerius), 63 f. 

Cato (Uticensis), 186. 

Catonis disticha , 254 f. 

Catullus, 56-62; 46; 48; 91; 96; 120 ; 
121; 122; 128; 129; 141; 145; 168; 
202 ; 281. 

Catulus (Q. Lutatius), 44. 

Celsus (A. Cornelius), 175; 173. 
Censorinus, 256. 

Cestius Pius (L.), 165. 

Cethegus (M. Cornelius), 36. 
Charisius, grammarian, 261; 176. 
Christian literature, 227 ; 243 ; 244- 
252 ; 258; 265-269; 270; 272 f.; 
276. 

Cicero (M. Tullius), 65-82; 12; 30; 
36; 45; 46; 47; 48; 64; 83; 85; 86; 
89 ; 91; 92; 95 ; 96; 138; 156; 159; 
160; 164; 166; 168; 170; 171; 183 ; 
192; 209 ; 210; 212; 213; 215; 219; 
224, 230; 237 ; 240; 246; 248; 252; 
257; 260; 267; 269; 270; 280; 281. 
Cicero (Q.), 95 f.; 64; 79. 

Cincius Alimentus, 33. 

Cinna (C. Helvius), 62; 167. 

Ciris, ascribed to Virgil, 141. 
Claudian, 273-275; 258; 276. 

Claudius, emperor, 171; 173; 178; 
179; 183; 191; 216. 



INDEX 


309 


Clitomachus, philosopher, 66. 

Code of Justinian, 264. 

Coelius Antipater, 43. 

Columella, 191 f. 

Comedy, 17-31; 6 ; 7; 8; 14; 15; 16; 

32; its plots and characters, 19. 
Commodianus, Christian poet, 249 f. 
Commodus, emperor, 228, 233. 
Constantine, emperor, 251; 257 ; 258 ; 
264; 270; 271. 

Constantinople, 226 ; 261; 278. 
Constantius, emperor, 261; 266. 

Copa, ascribed to Virgil, 191. 

Corbulo (Gnseus Domitius), 191. 
Cordus. See iElius Julius. 

Corinna, addressed in Ovid’s poems, 
145. 

Cornelia, mother of the Gracchi, 44 ; 
92. 

Cornelius Nepos. See Nepos. 
Cornificius, 45 ; 64; 95. 

Cornutus (L. Annaeus), 177; 184; 185. 
Costumes, theatrical, 15. 

Crassus (L.), 66; 70 ; 72. 

Crassus (P. Licinius), 36. 

Cremutius Cordus, historian, 176. 
Critolaus, Peripatetic philosopher, 49. 
Culex , ascribed to Virgil, 140 ; 141. 
Curtius Kufus (Q.), 191. 

Cynthia, beloved of Propertius, 135; 
136; 145. 

Cyprian (St.), 248 f. 

Dante, 111; 112; 113. 

Dares, 265. 

Decius, emperor, persecuted Chris¬ 
tians, 249. 

Delia, beloved of Tibullus, 132; 134; 
145. 

Demetrius, teacher of oratory, 66. 
Democritus, Greek philosopher, 51; 
52; 55. 

Demosthenes, 71; 77 ; 159 ; 209. 
Dictys, 265. 

Didius Julianus, emperor, 228. 

Digests, 264. 

Dio Cassius, 255. 


Dio Chrysostom, 234; 240. 
Diocletian, emperor, 250 ; 251; 252; 
255 ; 256 ; 264. 

Diodotus, Stoic philosopher, 66. 
Diogenes, Stoic philosopher, 49. 
Diomedes, grammarian, 261; 241. 
Dionysius, Greek writer, 270. 
Diphilus, Greek comic poet, 17 ; 26. 
Diroe , poem ascribed to Virgil, 63 f.; 
141. 

Disticha Catonis , 254 f. 

Diverbia, 16. 

Domitian, emperor, 195 ; 198 ; 199 ; 
201; 207 ; 211; 212; 213; 214; 
216; 219; 225. 

Domitius Afer, orator, 176. 

Domitius Marsus, 137. 

Domitius Ulpianus, 255. 

Donatus, 260; 48 ; 267. 

Dracontius, late poet, 276. 

Drepanius, panegyrist, 257. 

Elegy, 128-137. 

Elocutio novella, 240 ; 241. 

Emerson (K. W.), 183. 

Empedocles, Greek philosopher, 51; 
52; 53. 

Emperors, their influence upon litera¬ 
ture, 170 f.; 194 f.; 227-229. 

Ennius (Quintus), 8-10; 11; 12; 18; 

33; 40; 48 ; 53 ; 107 ; 236. 

Ephorus, Greek historian, 37. 
Epictetus, ethical preacher, 177. 
Epicurean doctrines, 49-55 ; 78 ; 182. 
Epicurus, 49; 50 ; 51; 52; 54; 55. 
Eumenius, panegyrist, 257. 

Euphorion, 131. 

Euripides, 107; 121; 179; 180. 
Eusebius, 48 ; 262; 268. 

Eutropius, 262. 

Fabian us (Papirius), 177. 

Fabius (Q.-Labeo), 37. 

Fabius Pictor, 33 ; 37; 158. 

Fabius Maximus Cunctator, 36. 

Fabulae Atellanse, 30. 

Fabulae palliate, 18; 29. 



310 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


Fabulse praetextse, 7; 9 ; 12; 13; 179; 
184; 188. 

Fabuise togatae, 18; 29; 138. 

Fabulae trabeatae, 138. 

Fannius (G.), 39; 43. 

Fenestella, historian, 164. 

Fescennine verses, 29. 

Firmicus Maternus, 260. 

Festus, wrote a hand-book of history, 
262. 

Festus (Pompeius), 166; 167; 234. 
Flavius, grammarian, 251. 

Florus, 231. 

Frontinus (Sextus Julius), 206. 
Fronto, 235 f.; 228; 237 ; 238; 240; 

241; 243, 246. 

Fundanus, 118. 

Furius. See Philus. 

Furius Antias, 43. 

Furius Bibaculus, 64; 63. 

Gaius, jurist, 233. 

Galba, emperor, 194; 206; 215; 216. 
Galerius, 252. 

Gallic oratory, 256 f.; 264 f. 
Gallicanus (Vulcacius), 255. 

Gallienus, emperor, 229. 

Gallio (L. Junius), 165. 

Gallus (Cornelius), 131; 100; 101; 
107; 129. 

Gallus (C. Asinius), 103 ; 171; 176. 
Gargilius Martialis (Q.), 256. 

Gellius (Aulus), 236 f.; 7 ; 259; 

260. 

Germanicus, 173; 176; 178; 270. 

Geta (Hosidius), 254. 

Gnipho (M. Antonius), 66; 96. 
Gordian I, emperor, 229. 

Gracchi, 36; 43 ; 44; 45. 

Gracchinus (Julius), 176. 

Gracchus (Gaius), 45; 43; 236. 
Gracchus (Tiberius), 45; 43. 

Grammar, 93; 96; 166; 176; 225; 

233 f.; 256: 260 f. 

Granius Licinianus, 232. 

Gratian, emperor, 265; 271. 

Grattius, 137. 


Greek influence in Roman literature, 
1; 4; 5; 17; 21; 27; 32; 37; 48, 
128 f.; 179; 180; 226; 283; in Ro¬ 
man manners, 33; 128 f. 
Gregorianus, 264. 

Hadrian, emperor, 219; 225; 227; 229; 

231; 232; 233; 235; 241; 255. 
Haterius (Q.), 165. 

Heliogabalus, emperor, 255. 

Hemina (L. Cassius), 37; 39. 
Heraclitus, Greek philosopher, 51. 
Herennius Priscus, Stoic, 213. 
Herennius, treatise addressed to, 45; 
69. 

Hermogenianus, jurist, 264. 

Herodian, 255. 

Herodotus, 219. 

Herondas, Greek poet, 62. 

Hesiod, 107. 

Hieronymus. See Jerome. 

Hilary (St.), 265 f.; 258. 

Hirtius (A.), 87 f. 

Historia Augusta , 255. 

History, 33; 43; 88; 163 f.; 173; 176; 

191; 232; 255 ; 261 ff. 

Homer, 6; 62; 107; 108; 109; 114; 

118; 149; 171; 187; 197; 219. 
Honorius, emperor, 273. 

Horace, 114-127; 12; 41; 64; 96; 98; 
99; 100 ; 139; 168; 185; 186; 188; 
193; 219 ; 231; 233; 234; 282. 
Hortensius Hortalus, 95; 59; 69; 77. 
Hosidius Geta, 254. 

Hostius, 43. 

Hyginus (C. Julius), 167. 

Hyginus, writer on surveying, 225. 

Institutes of Justinian, 264. 

Itineraries, 261. 

Jerome (St.), 267 f.; 48; 49; 56 ; 193; 

231; 250; 251; 252; 258; 261; 262. 
Johnson, Samuel, 221. 

Josephus, Greek historian, 217 ; 267. 
Juba, grammarian, 234. 

Julian, emperor, 257, 261, 263. 



INDEX 


311 


Julianus (Salvius), jurist, 233. 

Julius Obsequens, 262. 

Julius Paulus, jurist, 255. 

Jurists, 37 ; 44 ; 96 ; 167 ; 192 ; 225; 
233 ; 255 ; 264. 

Justin (M. Junianus Justinus), 164; 
232. 

Justin, emperor, 279. 

Justinian, emperor, 233 ; 264 ; 283. 
Juvenal, 218-222 ; 202; 211; 225; 
283. 

Juvencus, 270. 

Labeo, see Fabius. 

Labeo (M. Antistius), 167 ; 192. 
Labeo (Cornelius), 255. 

Laberius (Decimus), 30 f.; 62. 
Labienus (T.), 165. 

Lactantius, 251 f. 

Laelius (C.), 39 ; 24; 38. 

Lampridius (.d£lius), 255. 

Laevius, 62. 

Latin language, 2; changes in, 237. 
Latro (M. Porcius), 165. 

Lesbia, 57 ; 60; 61; 145. 

Licinianus (Granius), 232. 

Licinius Imbrex, comic poet, 23. 
Licinius (L.), orator, 45. 

Livius Andronicus. See Andronicus. 
Livy (T. Livius), 156-163; 166; 168; 
171; 186 ; 191; 197; 216; 231; 232; 
262; 270. 

Lucan (M. Annaeus Lucanus), 185- 
187; 165; 184; 190; 201; 231. 
Lucian, Greek writer, 240. 

Lucilius (Gaius), 39-42; 43; 45; 115 ; 

117; 118; 121; 219. 

Lucilius, Seneca’s writings addressed 
to, 181. 

Lucretius (T.), 47-55 ; 46; 96; 138; 
139; 168; 193. 

Luscius Lanuvinus, comic poet, 23. 
Lycophron, Alexandrian poet, 63. 
Lygdamus, poet, 132 f. 

Macer (Gaius Licinius), 44; 158. 
Macer, epic poet, 138; 143 ; 155. 


Macrobius, 260. 

Maecenas (Gaius), 99; 100; 101; 104; 

116; 118; 119; 121; 124; 135; 137. 
Mamertinus, panegyrist, 257. 
Manilius, 138 f.; 156 ; 173. 

Marcus Aurelius, emperor, 227 f.; 

233; 234; 235; 236; 237. 

Marius (Gaius), 43; 83; 91; 158. 
Marius Maximus, 255. 

Marius Yictorinus, 256. 

Martial, 201-203; 140; 141; 158 ; 211; 
219. 

Martialis (Q. Gargilius), 256. 
Martianus Capella, 260. 

Masks, theatrical, 15. 

Maternus (Curiatius), 201; (Firrni- 
cus), 260. 

Matius (Gnaeus), 43; 62. 

Maximus of Tyre, 240. 

Mela (Pomponiu8), 192; 191. 

Melissus (Laevius), 43. 

Memmius (Gaius), 64 ; 49 ; 57. 
Menander, Greek comic poet, 17; 25; 
26. 

Menippean satires, 93; 183; 189. 
Menippus, Greek Cynic, 93. 

Messalla (M. Valerius), 99; 131; 132; 

133; 134; 141; 155. 

Metres, 40 f.; 6 ; 7; 28; 121; 122; 124; 

129; 136; 140; 144; 153. 

Middle Ages, 112; 243; 272; 281. 
Milton, 155; 280. 

Mimes, 30 f. 

Mimnermus, Greek poet, 129. 
Minucius Felix, 245 f.; 248 ; 252. 
Molo, Cicero’s teacher, 66. 

Montanus, 247. 

Montanus. See Votienus. 
Monurnentum Ancyranum , 98. 
Moretum , ascribed to Virgil, 141. 
Morris (William), the Earthly Para¬ 
dise, 239. 

Mucianus (P. Licinius Crassus), 44. 
Musonius Kufus (C.), 177; 270. 

Naevius (Gnaeus), 6; 7; 8; 9 ; 18; 53; 

107. 




312 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


Namatianus (Rutilius Claudius), 275. 
Nazarius, panegyrist, 257. 
Neraesianus, 254; 188. 

Nepos (Cornelius), 91 f.; 64; 94 ; 265. 
Nero, emperor, 171; 176; 177; 178 ; 
179; 185; 186; 188; 191,194; 195 ; 
197; 216; 252. 

Nerva, emperor, 211, 216; 255; 263. 
Nigidius Figulus (P.), 96. 

Nonius, 259; 260. 

Nonnus, Greek poet, 274. 

Notitia , 261. 

Novius, 30. 

Numerianus, emperor, 255. 

Obsequens (Julius), 262. 

Opilius (Aurelius), 96. 

Oppius (Gaius), 88. 

Optatianus, 269 f. 

Orators, 5; 34; 45 ; 95; 164 f.; 175 f.; 

225 ; 256 f.; 264. 

Orosius, 263. 

Otho, emperor, 194; 216. 

Ovid, 143-155; 14; 64; 130; 132; 
134; 135; 136 ; 137 ; 138; 140 ; 142; 
156; 168; 173; 186; 188; 197; 202; 
poems ascribed to, 142. 

Pacuvius, 11 ; 12; 18; 53. 

Paetus Thrasea, 184; 203. 

Palladius, 261. 

Pansetius, Stoic philosopher, 39; 49. 
Pandects , 264. 

Panegyrists, 257. 

Papinianus, jurist, 233. 

Papirius Fabianus, 177. 

Parthenius, 129. 

Paul (St.), alleged correspondence 
with Seneca, 183. 

Paulus (Julius), 255. 

Pentadius, 254. 

Perilla, Ovid’s daughter, 154. 

Periods of Roman literature, 3; 281 ff. 

Persius (A.-Flaccus), 183-185; 

177; 193; 219; 234. 

Pertinax, emperor, 228. 

Pervigilium Veneris, 241-243 ; 272. 


Petronius (C.-Arbiter), 188-191. 

Peutinger Tablet , 261. 

Phaedrus, Epicurean, 66. 

Phaedrus, poet of fables, 172 f. 
Philemon, Greek comic poet, 17. 
Philo, Jewish-Greek philosopher, 66; 
267. 

Philosophy, 49 ; 78; 176 f.; 181 f.; 
260. 

Philus (L. Furius), 39. 

Piso (L. Calpumius-Frugi), 37 ; 

39. 

Piso (Calpumius), conspired against 
Nero, 172; 178; 185; 186; 188. 
Plato, 219; 239. 

Plautus, 18-23; 27 ; 28; 29; 233; 236 ; 
270. 

Pliny the elder, 204-206; 195; 215; 

222 ; 231; 253 ; 256. 

Pliny the younger, 222-225; 160; 
202; 204; 211; 229; 230; 244 ; 257; 
265. 

Plotius, 116; Plotius Sacerdos. See 
Sacerdos. 
j Plutarch, 234. 

Pollio (Gaius Asinius), 99; 100; 101; 
102; 103; 118; 122; 160; 166; 167; 
171; 176; (Trebellius), 255. 
Polybius, Greek historian, 39; 92; 
158. 

Pompeius Trogus. See Trogus. 
Pompey, 47; 56; 67; 68 ; 69; 81; 82; 

84; 93; 158; 163; 186; 187. 
Pompilius Andronicus (M.), 96. 
Pomponius (L.), 30. 

Pomponius Secundus (P.), 188; 204. 
Pomponius (Sextus), 233. 

Ponticus, poet, 138; 143. 

Porcius Latro, 143. 

Porphyrio (Pomponius), grammarian, 
234. 

Posidonius, Stoic, 66. 

Postumius Albinus, 33. 

Priapea , 140. 

Priscian, 261. 

Probus (M. Valerius), 193. 

Proculus, jurist, 192. 





INDEX 


313 


Propertius, 134-137; 130; 131; 132; 

143; 145; 146; 149; 168. 

Prose, Greek influence upon, 32; 

progress in, 46; 156. 

Prosper of Aquitania, 262. 
Prudentius, Christian poet, 272 f. 
Publilia, Cicero’s wife, 68. 

Publilius Syrus, 30 f.; 62. 

Punic war; first, 6; 33; 158 ; second, 
33; 36; 158; third, 38; 44. 
Pythagoras, doctrine, 153. 

Quadrigarius (Q. Claudius), 43; 158. 
Quintilian, 206-210; 175; 182; 195; 
202; 213. 

Quintus Curtius Rufus, 191. 

Rabirius, 138. 

Remmius Palsemon (Q.), 176 ; 184. 
Renatus (Flavius Vegetius), 261. 
Reposianus, 254. 

Roman literature; its importance, 1; 
284; its practical purpose, 2 f.; 
211 f.; its divisions, 3; 281 ff.; na¬ 
tive elements, 4; its progress, 48; 
its decay, 169; 226 f.; 283; Greek 
influence, 1; 4; 5; 17; 21; 27 ; 32; 
48; 128 f.; 226; 283; effect of the 
empire, 97. 

Roman society, 47 f.; 128 f. 

Romance languages, 210; 237. 

Romans practical, 2. 

Romans, our debt to, 283. 

Romanus (C. Julius), 256; (Aquila), 
256. 

Roscius, actor, 66. 

Rutilius Claudius Namatianus, 275. 
Rutilius Rufus (P.), 44. 

Sabinus, poet, 146. 

Sacerdos (Marius Plotius), 256. 
Sallust, 89-91; 88; 128; 230; 236; 265. 
Sammonicus (Serenus), 253 f. 

Santra, 96. 

Sappho, 114; 121. 

Satire, 39; 40; 41; 42; 93; 117 f. 
179; 183; 184; 188 f.; 219 f. 


Saturnian verse, 7; 6; 9. 

Scsevola (P.), 44; (Mucius), 44; (Q. 
Mucius), 44; 66; (the augur), 66; 
70; (Q. Cervidius), jurist, 233. 
Scaurus (Terentius), 233. 

Scipio (Cn. Cornelius), 7; Africanus 
the elder, 36; 38; Africanus the 
younger, 24; 38; 39; 49; P. Cor¬ 
nelius, 33; Nasica, 37. 

Sedigitus (Volcacius), 44. 

Sedulius, 276. 

Sempronius (Gaius ——Tuditanus), 44. 
Seneca, the elder, 165 f.; 168, 170; 
175; 177. 

Seneca, the younger, 177-183; 14; 
165; 170; 171; 184; 185; 188; 197; 
201; 209; 210; 219. 

Septimius (L.), 265. 

Septimius Severus, emperor, 228; 233 ; 
247. 

Septuagint , 217. 

Servius Sulpicius Rufus, 96. 

Servius, commentary on Virgil, 261; 
192. 

Severus (Cornelius), poet, 138. 

Sextii, philosophers, 176; 177. 

Sextus Empiricus, 234. 

Shakespeare, 21; 151; 155. 

Siculus Flaccus, 225. 

Silius Italicus, 197f.; 202. 

Sisenna (L. Cornelius), 44; 88. 
Socrates, 239. 

Solinus, 256. 

Solon, 129. 

Sophocles, 107. 

Soranus (Q. Valerius), 44. 

Sotion, philosopher, 176 f. 

Spartianus (^Elius), 255. 

Statius, 198-201; 140; 141; 195; 202 ; 

209; 274; his father, 198; 201. 
Stella (Arruntius), 201. 

Stesichorus, Greek poet, 107. 

Stilicho, general, 273 ; 275. 

Stilo (L. ASlius Praeconinus), 44; 11; 
93. 

Stoic philosophy, 49; 78; 120; 124; 
177; 182; 228. 




314 


ROMAN LITERATURE 


/ 

Strabo (C. Julius Caesar), 13. 

Sueius, 62. 

Suetonius Paulinus, 191. 

Suetonius Tranquillus (C.), 229-231; 
24; 227; 243; 244 ; 255; 256; 261; 
262; 267. 

Sulla, 44 ; 47 ; 158. 

Sulpicia, poetess of elegies, 133. 
Sulpicia, poetess, 201. 

Sulpicius Severus, 263. 

Symmachus (Q. Aurelius), 265; 279. 

Tacitus, 211-218; 91; 195; 206 ; 209; 
222; 223; 225 f.; 244 ; 262; 263; 
283. 

Tacitus, emperor, 229. 

Tennyson, 242. 

Terentia, Cicero’s wife, 66 ; 68. 
Terentianus Maurus, 233 ; 241; 253. 
Terentius Scaurus, 233. 

Tertullian, 246-248; 249; 252; 258 ; 
266. 

Theatre, 14-16. 

Theocritus, Greek poet, 101; 107; 
114; 187. 

Theodoric, 278; 279. 

Theodorus, emperor, 257; 266; 267; 
272; 273. 

Theodorus, of Gadara, 170. 
Theopompus, Greek writer, 92. 
Thrasea. See Paetus. 

Tiberius, emperor, 170; 124; 155; 
165; 166; 170; 171; 172; 173 ; 174; 
175 ; 176 ; 177; 216. 

Tibullus, 131-134; 124; 130; 135 ; 145; 

146; 168; 211. 

Ticidas, poet, 64. 

Timaeus, Greek historian, 37. 

Tiro, 96; 79. 

Titinius, 29; 138. 

Titius, 13. 

Titus, emperor, 194; 195; 201; 205. 
Trabea, comic poet, 23. 

Tragedy, 11; 6; 7; 8; 12; 14; 17; 
32. 

Trajan, emperor, 211; 212; 214; 216 ; 
219; 223; 224 ; 225; 236; 246; 257. 


Trebellius Pollio, 255. 

Tribonian, jurist, 264. 

Trimalchio, in Petronius’s novel, 189; 
190. 

Triumvirate; first, 67 ; 84. 

Trogus, 163 f.; 232. 

Tullia, Cicero’s daughter, 68. 
Turpilius, comic poet, 29. 

Twelve tables , 5; 37. 

Tyrtaeus, 129. 

Ulpian, 255. 

Valens, emperor, 262; 263; 264; 
271. 

Valentinian I, 265. 

Valentinian II, 267. 

Valerian, emperor, persecuted Chris¬ 
tians, 249. 

Valerius Antias, 43; 88; 158. 

Valerius Flaccus (C.), 195-197. 
Valerius Maximus, 174 f.; 173,* 
219. 

Valgius Rufus, 131. 

Varius, 14; 116; 118. 

Varro Atacinus, 63; 118. 

Varro (M. Terentius), 92-94; 44; 96'* 
99; 192; 256; 260. 

Varus, 101. 

Vegetius, 261. 

Velleius Paterculus, 173 f.; 215. 
Verrius Flaccus, grammarian, 166: 
149 ; 167; 234. 

Verus (L.), 228; 235; 236; 237. 
Vespa, 254. 

Vespasian, emperor, 194; 195; 197; 

201; 204; 212; 216. 

Victorinus (C. Marius), 256; 260. 
Virgil, 100-113; 64; 96; 98; 99; 114*, 
115; 116; 118; 127; 131; 135; 140; 
141; 143; 153; 161; 167; 168; 171; 
173; 187; 188; 192; 193; 196; 197; 
202 ; 209; 217; 219; 232; 233 ; 240 ; 
241; 254; 260; 261; 270 ; 280; 282 
poems ascribed to, 140 ; 141. 
Vitellius (P.), orator, 176. 

Vitellius, emperor, 194; 216, 



INDEX 


315 


Vitruvius, 167 f. 

Volcacius. See Sedigitus and Galli- 
canus. 

Vopiscus (Flavius), 255. 

Votienus Montanus, orator, 175. 
Vulcacius. See Volcacius. 

Whittier, 272. 

Wordsworth, 272. 

Xenophon, Greek writer, 92. 

Zeno, Epicurean, 66. 

\ 



V 






















































































































































































































































•'*A A 

A* % 0 0 

A ft ' 

• > r 


*, S ' 


H A 



,o v 



'A'* % ^ I 

xh -t ^’v 

■ *5 ^ o 

•b £, v <^ 1 v> 

s' -* 



N J^f/ 

Ax.- ^ | j ■' 


»■ 

, «; n 

i> o' x° 

rf. ✓* A/' i 

^> ♦ a 

A" > 

* A 

o 0 \0 'O 

N 0 ^ 

-v ^ 

ft0‘ ^ 0 A 

✓ 



^ V 


<\V xT> 

* <-\V 


% 

* * '' <P % . , fl C y 0 * * * \ A N c %,''**• 

ry m^' *4 „<$> Jv c ^ « O. 

0° x X /T?5^» *• ^s J* * .-S-Ws ' ° O * 

v ** &\\://X<^- . TV- x. ^ 

o o N 

<<• 

°o 




O 

• * * ^ V 0 0 v ^ * 0 , - c . 

A^ * A « ^ ^ 

« c. - <* .(A X,< Al 4 v 

, : % $ . MMh ° ^ «* 

»\> ,A 

g#» <§•' % J . 

% A r> ✓ 

* X * A ^ ^ 

r W x 




<H t*. ^ 

\ > yi 

a C c. c*v ✓ 

*•- •" v s >';,;/•> "•> 



’bo' 


-*> ,v, 

- X . V 

x\ n N C ^ J * * S \ > 8 „ 

/ * c °o 

k \ V «jSSStor*. ' - 

r \V V 

a © o x 



s ^ t ■ 

- *$*> c? 


*v - 





r o0^ 



* 0 



0 * V 


^ V s 


\° °A 


<* y o * x ^ \ X N , ' < * * X 

J, V C 0 N C * Xd 

1 + x \ X ° 

^ " +*■ v* -« 

x 0 ^. 

^ * o I’ c^ /. * ,^0 C> /- t 

;%. ,, */*-'.\.v v V'"» 

Vt ;'^ V* ^ ^ ; 

* & f X - ° <<» O 

, v , 0 x, <V * w v -^s /<■ ^ y, v *U> w> 

0 v- ^ /o ^v ,° n " ,:v— v/v 

^4 ' -2, ■? A\ ^ ^s - K. /Scvt Y/Xz? r - 

=o^ :^*»i x 

'<K's‘ !' 00 '" 

/ 2 > o v ^ x 0 /■ c i 

AO r (C 5 i 0 r . ^ 

: %% v -/ £, \ % 

: ^ ■ v : , /V ‘ - S 

-a <\ '*o /f i ’ s s' ^ 0 ' i? J 0 • ft * A 

\ 0 N C -/> * * (x^ ^ft'- ' 8 * ^ .< 

C x. '■,'V * . ' Jru ,' X 2 -' * a\ x. 

; w ; M^: ° * 

O ft — ft'* / % ‘ 0 0 ’ ” O 0 \«ZW 9 i - * 

.,% " , "‘ v^s'lil'x "> 5S ° . 0 ^ -%ft '"'■ \> 

» A V v *.??,—./%'<■ ^ 4 ^' «’ .,-;•»•/ >*' "’V,, aV 

■'; ° ° / i J: -s 1 ^ V • :* s r , ; ‘h z <P \V 

: •- o 

x" ,.^ * " 





!■' 'J, ° ^ J ;- 

C /. ? e ^ 


V 5 * 

<&’ * a Tox 0 * 

V N \^^> \p v 



•K? <■ 

% V 



" aV 

!* ^ % 

A o ^ , 

V t 0 N -ft« K , 







V' < 

z ' z 

o CA> <<, ® 

- aV ^ 

s s <0 V <* y 0 ^ X 

(X» <, X 1 8 , 

& S-M*.' ?■ J 



aV iP. 
<3xV '/ 


<\ x ■?<> o 

-X ■V- ^ 

-X <\ o */ 



A O, v^s' A <f ^ 

A % s» N,: ft f b. “ ,<y v .‘"« '%, 



0 « X 











C ° N C vf 
■IS *> .-JvtVv f 



' " * 1 1 * 4 • . , ^ * 3 N ° ^ " » , , , » ' 


l'« *A <V 

/ f/ V 

b ^/ v-f 
s 






O v ' a * 0 * s 1 

tV <»- 1 f O 

• <A* -/jAW//' 4 ^ & 

" 'P* <A* * rCV\ Wj'/h o ^ ,<V 

\ - * 2 . 7 

> </\ ^ <* >. 


V » V 

v> »«*•» 


X* y 0 ., K * .A. 

, % ../ 



^ v . -^, „^ X1 V * ,\V AP. 

_ K . v ^V‘ 

,M «. ^ P-, * ^ V< * 

^ ^ v* 


O fe c5> -A 

<\ y 0 » X * A SU 

.i-V , o * c 

* ^ ^ c v *' 

« o 0 X . * 

* «J ^ * 

y O A ^ 

^ <*- + ^^VVXSs 3 ’ > _ 

\ CL c^“ y y v <* p.0 

V * 0 ^ W 9 » ' " \* s * * , ^-. * 0 N ° ’ <. 0 ^ * 8 I A 

A* r «> S, * «*» N ' , A 5, * A* V 

A — -r\ /i. r* *<* v, <*- * •>*■ '\ r o *<• .- 

i/'. .av .., i^smm , ^ ^ ^Mj/h a ^r> <^' 

<r - « ^\\W^ z ^ 'V 






V * 

V> ^ 

'V ''mS S ^ ^ 

^ ° C° " * i j % 

^ ^ V* 



■W 


o> / Ci. - /1 

* ' 

\ J&.' r}, y 

\V » _ * 




y 0 * X * »■ ' O * f j s s .0 ^ 

A x . c° N c * *o .<y * v ’ 8 * % 

^ A N ' - . .^#1^ * 


\ 0 ^. 



>* \ 
OQT 


n r %■ *■ » . . '*'\^ . . . , V '» .0 N 0 1 , 

j. 0 «.'*“/ c- \ x ^ jO' 

#u A 4 ^ .v, * -w0,w •* 

‘t. 4 . ° ^ 

> ./>. - : a <; " ^ v V 



o « A ” .A O / / / ^ xx S ' ,0' 

•* p /,'2'A ' g°V' 1 '** 

* . O q\ _ •< A > 



*v ^ 

»* af 1 'V/, 

A * \V , „ ^ * 

\/ s s ’ * r 


§ 

V ^ 

*~ 7 

O t 

•J 

* 


, V ' « ^ 

■<j j 

y 0 * K 
































